LIQUOR AFTER HOURS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 28 July 1928, Page 4

LIQUOR AFTER HOURS.

HOARDER AND VISITORS

an unusual case

\t the Manaia Court yesterday, before Mr. R. W. Tate S.M., the (H. Holmes) of the Manaia Hotel was charged witli selling liquor after hours; his wife, Elizabeth Holmes, with supplying liquor after hours; and a young man living at the hotel also with supplying liquox* and aiding and abetting, and live other men with being tound on licensed premises after hours. Alter hearinor the case the Magistrate intticted fines on the men illegally on the premises, on the boarder lor supplying liquor and on the licensee’s wife, the two other charges being withdrawn. The circumstances were that on May 26, at about 9.40 when Constable Scanned paid a surprise visit to the Manaia Hotel, he found two men in a room with glasses on a table, also three other men in a passage. As a result ol the visit of the police the charges as above were laid. Mr. G. H. Ryan appeared for the licensee and ' his wife, and for the boarder, and entered a plea of guiltj. Sergeant Henry said the charges were laid under section 205 of the Licensing Act. He added that the ofience of being on licensed premises after hours was very prevalent in Manaia, and he asked for the maximum penalty. He added that Holmes ran a aood house, but even the most respectable publicans were caught sometimes. Mr Ryan stated that Mrs. Holmes had supplied the boarder, who had a ricrht to purchase liquor, but no right to" supply others. The licensee s wire and the boarder were both first onencl-er-s. The sergeant mentioned that this was not so in. Mr. Holmes 5 case. The Magistrate said that section 2UO of the Act was not so well known as it should be. . Mr. Ryan nSked for suppression ot the name of the boarder, because it would be a. very serious matter dor him and might result in his losing his position. He had acted very foolishly in the matter, but. such a penalty would be too great, and, in addition, lie had pleaded guilty. , The Magistrate said that m such a case a man earned all he got. Such men were fast becoming a nuisance, and he had caused the major defendants to be landed in trouble. The boardei had been a very foolish person, hut he would accede to the request for suppression of his name. The punishment, otherwise might be greater than the offence deserved. - , , , The offenders were then each fined 40s and costs 10s.