MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Grey River Argus, 14 May 1935, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

SITTING AT GREYMOUTH. The following lengthy list of eases were dealt with by Mr. Henry Morgan, S.M., at a sitting of the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth yesterday. SeniorSergeant E. Quayle prosecuted. Thomas Arthur Farrell, of Nelson Creek, was charged that,, on March 26th, 1935, not being the holder of a license, he was in possession of apparatus capable of receiving wireless telegraphic communications. Mr. A. Walton, Inspector, said that defendant formerly held a license. A fine of £l/10/- with 12/- costs was inflicted.

Three charges were laid against John .Tones, that he did assist counsel and procure the commission of an offence that of the licensee of the Golden Eagle Hotel, exposing liquor and opening for the sale of liquor after hours on April 7th, 1935. Mr. ,T. W. Hannan for defendant, pleaded guilty to one of the charges and the two other were withdrawn.

James Steel, licensee of the Golden Eagle Hotel. Greymouth, was charged that on April 7th, 1935, (1) Opening his premises for the sale of liquor after hours; (2)_ Exposing and (3) Selling liquor during such time his premises were required by law to be closed. Mr. J. W. Hannan, for defendant, pleaded guilty to “selling” and the other charges were withdrawn. Harry Minchin pleaded not guilty to - )ei ng unlawfully on the premises. Senior-Sergeant Quayle said that in company with Constable Cogswell, he visited the hotel on Sunday, April 7th at midday, an d found 14'men at the tVa h T ? e 1 d(,fendan t. Minchin, had nor n ! ?j” let 0 the hOtel for d »‘- hls Wlfe was in hospital. ,i.r j J he eireum stanees in which said h2 nt VI f ° Und ’ the Magistrate said he could not accept his excuse th?l WaS th “ a seh ool” of men at wbh h io7 r>< l fcndi " lt was fined 15/witl 10/. costs. Thirteen other deW 10 11,11 not a PP ear . and were ist offenders, were each fined 15/wrih costs 10/, The licensee was < n o e< ’ -S 3 Posts ln /‘. and Jones £2 with costs 10/-. James Hearn, licensee of the Railway Hotel, Kumara Junction, was charged with opening, exposing and selling liquor after hours on April 6th. fiannan pleaded guilty to the selling” charge and the other informations were withdrawn. Three persons found unlawfully on tnu premises were each fined 15/- with 10/- costs.

The licensee having a previous conviction was fined £5 with costs 12/-. Frank Valentine Wade was charged that on November Ist at Christchurch with being in possession of a .22 calibre rifle for a longer period than seven days without being registered as the owner.

Defendant who pleaded gniltv, was fined £l/10/- with 10/- costs, 14 days’ being allowed in which to make payment.

Horace Charleston, Frederick Lindbom, Frederick McGrath and John Owen were each fined 5/- with 10/costs for cycling without lights after sunset.

L. G. C. Perrins, traveller, of Christchurch, was on the information of the Traffic Inspector (Air. IT. Lane), charged that on March 23rd, 1935, he did permit a. motor vehicle to remain stationary in Tainui Street between the hours at 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. for a longer period at one time than fifteen minutes.

A fine of 5/- with costs 10/- and solicitor’s fee 10/6 was inflicted. Erie Collie was on the information of Air. 11. Lane, Traffic Inspector, charged with driving a motor car without a tail light on Alarch 23, 1935. at Greymouth. A fine of 10/- with costs 10/-, and solicitor’s fee 10/6 was inflicted. C. 11. Chandler, of Mawheraiti, was, on the information of the Traffic Inspector (11. Lane) charged with using a motor truck without the assign ed number and distinguishing marks affixed thereto. He was further charged with allowing the motor truck to remain stationary in Tainui Street on Alarch 23rd for a longer period than 15 minutes. A fine of 10/- with court costs 12/and solicitor’s fee 10/6 was inflicted in the first case and a. fine of 10/-, costs 12/- and solicitor’s fee 10/6, on the second information. UNION HOTEL CASE. i John Darwell, licensee of the Union Hotel, Greymouth was charged with opening his premises for the sale of liquor after hours on April 13. !He was further charged with aiding and abetting the offence of three men who were charged with being found on the premises. Joseph Patrick Low was charged that, on. April 13. he did (wilfully obstruct Sergeant John Isbister in Die lawful execution of his duty, at the premises of the Union Hotei, Greymouth.

Mr J. W. Hannan appeared for Darwell and Low, and entered a plea of not guilty fo the three charges. The three men charged with being found on the, premises did not appear. One of them, a second offender was fined 25s with 10s costs, and the othei’s were each fined 15s with 10s costs.

Sergeant Isbister said that on April 13. at 11.10 p.m., he visited the hotel in company with Constable Pat erson. Before knocking on the door they heard what appeared to be men (walking about in th<» vicinity of the bar. The door was opened bv a. nian named Hazeldine a porter. On entering witness could see a number of men in the passage. However, the swing doors inside the front doors were then closed and on frying to open them he found that they were being held by some person, whom presently he saw was Low. the Reensee’s son-in-law. When ho made this Jiseovcry he forced the doors open and on going through he saw a number of men running upstairs. He managed to stop three of them who wore Ihe three, defendants charged iwith being found on the promises. lie had then gone upstairs with the licensee, who had come out of the bar and found Iliad the doors leading to both Hie front and hack fiire-escapes were open and he .was sure that the remainder of the men could have escaped that way. Witness later askT,ow what he. meant by holding the 'door and he replied “T thought you were some old drunks trying to • get in”. Witness was sure that the holding of the door prevented him from catching the rest of the i*ion he saw running towards the stairs and he had no doubt he would have found them in front of the bar slide.

To Mr. Hannan: The swing doors would close themselves after anyone passed through. There were no curtains between me and the men rushing towards the stairs. I did not

notice the front fire escape was not let down, but there is no escape to let down at the back. Once a man gets upstairs in the Union Hotel he hag a. very good chance of escape. To the Magistrate: The doors of both fire escapes were, open. I suppose it took us about half a minute t<o open the swing doors. Once we found it was Low holding them, it did not take us long to break down his resistance. Constable J. L. Patterson corroborated the evidence, of the Sergeant. In evidence the defendant, Darwell. said tihat he did not see the men in the passage until he heard the- noise when the Sergeant came in. There had not been any liquor served. The front fire-escape was not used and neither the constable or the sergeant went to the back door to s’ee if it was locked. The men in. the passage must have come in through t'he back gate, which was sometimes left unlocked when horses were stabled at the back.

To the Senior-Sergeant I was in the kitchen when the Sergeant came in and I then went into the bar to see if everything was alright, alt hough I did not put on the lights. Hazeldine is not employed by me. H, do not pay him to stand at the front door. He stays at the hotel. The other defendant, Low, said that he was not interested in the management of the hotel. He had a business of his own, a motor garage and stayed at the lyitel. He had been jus’t going out when the police came to the hotel and he had hold the glass swing door, as he did. not want it to slum in anyone’s face. He did not know it was the police, and he had no intention of stopping them. He did not see any men in the passage. To Senior-Sergeant Quayle: —I did not see the Sergeant, he was in the dark. You have only to look at me and at t'he Sergeant and Constable to see who could hold the door. Either I am very strong or the police arc very weak and should be in a sanitorium.

The Magistrate said that in a good many such eases there was a conflict of evidence between the police and the defendants. He was satisfied that in the present case the police had proved circumstances from which only one inference could be drawn t’hat the premises were being used for a breach of the law. The evidence of the licensee, to his mind, was unsatisfactory and he was satisfied that the licensee was in the bar all the time, and that Low acted, in the way he didi. not thinking that it was a drunk at the door, but that his action would give the licensee a chance to clear away evidence and enable the men to get away. It: his mind the offence of opening had been proved. Ho was not satisfied with Low’s statement and he accepted the police evidence that Low wilfully obstructed them. Each would therefore be convicted. The licensee had not been before the court for twelve months.

Air. Hannan suggested to the Afag istrato t'hat in inflicting the penalty he should take into consideration that both charges against the licensee arose out of the same set of circumstances. The Magistrate intimated that it was his intention to inflict only one penalty. On the charge of opening, the licensee was fined £5, with 10s costs and on the charge of aiding and abetting was convicted without penalty. Low was convicted and fined £2. with 10s costs for obstructing.