DRUNKENNESS DEFINED.

Hastings Standard, Issue 31, 2 June 1896, Page 2

DRUNKENNESS DEFINED.

The S.M. of the Wellington Court has fixed upon a definition—a legal definition—for drunkenness, Mr Martin says that a man must be held to be drunk, no matter how small the quantity of liquor he may have imbibed, as long as the liquor caused him to act to the public annoyance in such a way as lie would not have done had he not taken any. This is a very practical view of the matter, for the S.M. judges drunkenness not by the quantity imbibed but by the effect produced. The country has long stood in need of a sensible ruling in respect of drunkenness, for it has been ludicrous to see in how many different ways witnesses havo endeavored to prove j[tho guiltiness of a " drunk." " His breath smelled very strongly of liquor " is not an uncommon piece of evidence, or " he was rolling about the streets," while as a defence we have heard, " I only had two nobblers, Sir, and I can drink six without being drunk." It will be necessary under Mr Martin's ruling to prove that the accused had taken liquor and that his behaviour after that was annoying to the public. But we shall now require a definition of " public annoyance." Is a man guilty of public annoyancs when he persists in monopolising the whole footpath by a zig-zag gait'? Is he guilty when he clings to a lamp-post and harangues the people in disjointed language ? Is he causing the public annoyance by his alleged singing in the small hours of the morning ? The "public annoyance" is capable of much elasticity and wo want a clear definition of it, to fit in with tho new legal meaning of drunkenness.