THE LICENSING ACT

Evening Star, Issue 15344, 19 November 1913, Page 8

THE LICENSING ACT

CHARGES AGAINST A TUBLICAN. At the. City Tolice Court this morning Joseph Duncan Winter was charged that on the. 26th October, at Green Island, being a licensed publican, ho did, during the time such licensed promises—to wit. the Commercial Hotel—were required to bo closed, sell a bottle of beer. William Winter and Lucy Winter wero charged that, being persons other than the licensee of tho Commercial Hotel, thev did supply liquor to Constable Geddes at a time when such person was not entitled to be lawfully supplied with liquor. Sub-inspector Fouhv prosecuted, and Mr Hanlon defended. Mrs Winter pleaded guilty, and the other two defendants not gmlty. Sub-inspector Fouhy stated that the facts were that on Sunday, the 26th October Constable Geddes and another constable went out in plain clothes to the hotel. They went to the back door and met the licensee's son, who was barman. The constables asked for two glasses of beer. The son said he could not supply them with glasses, but with a bottle. He then went into the house, and Mrs Winter came out afterwards with a bottle and handed it to Constable Geddes, who paid her a shilling for it. Constable Geddes said that at 7.15 on the 26th October he visited the, accused's house in company with Constable Forward. They went to the back door, and there saw a young girl, whom they asked if thev could see any of the young follow?. William Winter came to the door, and thev asked him to give them two glasses o"f beer, to which lie replied : " I can't give you any glasses, but a bottle." About five minutes later Mrs Winter came to the door with a bottle of beer under her apron. She said she didn't like giving beer to strangers on Sunday. She then handed over the bottle, and witness handed her Is for it. Witness did not see the licensee. Mr Hanlon stated that he proposed to show that the proprietor of tho hotel was not on the premises at the time. Tiro police evidence did not contradict that. He was away from the place, and had the only key to the bar. Nobody had any authority to sell liquor for" him. He know nothing of what was going- on in the house while he was awav, and his wife and son had no authority to sell any liquor. They did not sell any liquor that, belonged to Mr Winter. If' those facts were established, thev would bo sufficient to exonerate Mr Winter. Tho son had a bottle of beer in bus bedroom, which lie intended to take with him for a. drive the next day. Circumstances precluded him from going for the drive. When the constables came, it was impossible for them to get a glass of beer. When they pressed the. request, the sor raid he could get a bottle for them. The son went up to his bedroom, got the bottle, of beer, and told hi's mother. She took the bottle and ' went to tho door and gave it to Constable Geddes. Mrs Winter was responsible for tho sale, but neither, the son nor tho father were, responsible under tho circumstances. In las evidence Joseph Duncan Winter stated that he was one and a-half miles away from the hotel on the day in question, and had tho only bar key with him Lucy Winter stated that when she went to the door with the bottle of beer, one of_ the constables said thev were terribly thirsty. Y\ illiam Winter also gave evidenoe. His Worship reserved liis decision for a week. Joseph Duncan Winter was ako charged that on the Bth November, during the time his licensed premises were required to be closed, he did allow liquor purchased before the hours of closing to bo consumed on the premises. Constable Bosworth gave evidence to having gone into the stable of the. hotel and having seen some men there. He heard the "clinking of glasses, and found a jar of beer. His Worship also adjourned this charge for one week. William Duncan. Frederick Berry, Alvin M'Coll, and Robert Morrison were each charged that on the Bth November they were found on the licensed premises of the Commercial Hotel, Green Island, at a, time (11.15) when such premises were required to be closed. Frederick Bciry and William Duncan wero each charged with giving a false name to Constable Bosworth. All tho defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges of having been on the promises when such premises were to be closed. Mr Hanlon represented M'Coll. Bern-, and Duncan. Morrison did not appear. Const-able- Bosworth gave evidence to having found the men in the stable after closing time. Mr Hanlon said that the two men admitted having given false names, but they now recognised that they did wrong. The defendants gave evidence, M'Coll i stating that he went there, to get his horse and a jar of beer which he had left there. Duncan and Berry said they went to arrange to hire a I rap for a drive. His Worship stated that there appeared to him some difference betwren M'Coil's case and that of Duncan and Bei-ry, whose evidence he did not believe. With regard to M'Coll, it did seem as if he his horse and his jar of beer there. •• Whether he went there for any other purpose than that was not for His Worship to 6ay. M'Coll was apparently there legitii match", and the case against him would he dismissed. For being on licenced premises Duncan and Bern- would each be fined ICte, with costs, and for giving false names would each be fined 20s and costs. Morrison, who sent in a written statement that be, too, went to arrange about the hire of a. trap, was also fined 10s with ccets for being on licensed premises.