Analysis Of Liquor Not Always Needed

Northern Advocate, 16 August 1949, Page 5

Analysis Of Liquor Not Always Needed

PALMERSTON N„ Tue. (P.A.) Widespread interest attaches to a judgment delivered by Mr Justice Gresson in the Supreme Court at Palmerston North today, in which His Honor upset the recent magisterial interpretation of a section of the Licensing Act. The judgment was on appeals against the decision of Mr J. R. Herd, S.M., who acquitted the licensee and barman of a Woodville hotel on charges arising from the after-hour sale of liquor on the ground that the act required the prosecution to submit an analysis of liquor sold. His Honor ruled that, except in certain circumstances, an analysis was not required and that, on the evidence in the case in question, convictions should have been entered by the magistrate. REMITTED TO S.M. Both cases were remitted to the magistrate,,with a direction that convictions be entered and penalties imposed. “These are two appeals,” said His Honor, “each by way of a case stated against the decision of a stipendiary magistrate dismissing the informations alleging respectively a sale by a licensee and ( supply by a barman of liquor. “Evidence was given by a constable of having found on a visit to the bar three persons unlawfully on the premises (and these had subsequently been convicted), one having in his hand a glass of what resembled beer, the other two having glasses in front of them on the counter, one glass partly filled and the other containing dregs of what appeared to be beer.” SENSIBLE CONSTRUCTION His Honor continued: “It is most improbable that the legislature intended to render impossible a prosecution where the beer supplied had been entirely consumed, and any analysis rendered impracticable. “The language not merely permits, but invites, a sensible construction not producing such highly inconvenient consequences.

“Both appeals will be allowed, with costs £5/5/- in each case, and the cases remitted to the magistrate with a direction that a conviction should be entered in each case and an appropriate penalty imposed.”