Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LICENSE ENDORSED

AFTER HOURS TRADING POLICE OFFICERS OBSTRUCTED Arising out of the police visit on April 1 to the Rugby Hotel, in Hope street, William James Bevis, toe licensee, was charged with obstructing Sergeant W. H. Dunlop in the execution of his duty and with selling liquor after hours. Mr J. B. Callan (for defendant! pleaded guilty. , On the first charge he was fined £3 and costs, and on the second charge £lO and costs. The Licensing Act conviction was ordered to be endorsed on his license.

Sub-inspector Fahey said that at 9.10 p.m. Sergeant Dunlop and he visited the hotel. Immediately inside the gate they found defendant and five or six men," who had already appeared before the court and pleaded guilty. Each had a bottle of beer. Bevis was spoken to by Sergeant Dunlop, hut he turned and walked away. Sergeant Dunlop called out to him and followed him. Bevis entered the kitchen door and closed it on tho sergeant. After some delay tho sergeant was admitted. Everything was clear in the hotel, and although nobody was in the bar the room was filled with smoke. Mr Callan said that on the night of the police visit Bevis was in the throes of negotiating the sale of the hotel. Tho land agent and the solicitor for the prospective purchaser were at the hotel, and his intentness on business undoubtedly caused carelessness in the conduct of the hotel that night. Without doubt defendant must plead guilty to the charge under the Licensing Act. “ As to the obstruction, I think it is proper that your Worship should understand that tho sub-inspector and sergeant were both in plain clothes,” stated Mr Callan. “Of course,- they have a perfect right to use, in the discharge of their duty, any costume convenient. but your Worship will make some allowance for the agitation of a man who sees two men in a dark passage, and one says he is a policeman. The Magistrate: Does he know the sub-inspector or sergeant by sight? Mr Callan said defendant did not know whether they were policemen or tho remark was a “gag.” Bevis succumbed to the influence of fear and bolted. Technically he had broken the law. The police, ho thought, would not consider the breach serious. There was little delay. As to the trading, Mr Callan asked that tho magistrate should not treat the breach os one demanding the endorsement of the license. The occasion was exceptional and. did not show an habitual course of conduct and breaking the law. “With regard to the breach of selling, the practice recently has been that on. conviction, unless the circumstances' are very exceptional, the license be endorsed, said the Magistrate. “In the Present case I can hardly agree with Mr Callan that the circumstances do not call for endorsement. I think they do. It may be that on this night defendant w.as negotiating the sale of .his premises, but, whatever other business he may have been engaged in, his first business was to see that his hotel was conducted properly. It appears to me that if the

defendant was conducting a sale of the hotel, he was not losing sight of tho sale of liquor. This seems to be au occasion calling for tho endorsement of the license.”

As to the charge of obstruction, the Magistrate said Bevis had shut Hie door and had prevented the. police from making immediate investigation, and it might be possible that this hindered their efforts. He agreed with Mr Callan that the obstruction in this case was not so serious as it might have been. On the charge of obstruction Bevis would be fined £3 and costs. 5

After perusing the records tho Magistrate commented that defendant had had a previous conviction under the Licensing Act. Mr Callan: Yes; in December, 1925. Ho asked that His Worship should take into consideration, among other things, that defendant had admitted from the earliest that he would plead guilty, thus saving the police, court, and State some trouble. _ The Magistrate: 1 will take that into consideration, but, this being a case of a second offence, defendant is fined £lO and costs, and the conviction is ordered to be endorsed on the license.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19270506.2.62

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 19549, 6 May 1927, Page 6

Word Count
707

LICENSE ENDORSED Evening Star, Issue 19549, 6 May 1927, Page 6

LICENSE ENDORSED Evening Star, Issue 19549, 6 May 1927, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert