LICENSING LAW

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22132, 11 June 1935, Page 11

LICENSING LAW

alleged breaches PROSECUTIONS FAIL [BY TELEGBAFH OWN CORRESPONDENT ] GISBORNE. Monday A series of informations for alleged breaches of the Licensing Act was brought against a wine and spirit company in the Magistrate's Court to-day, before' Mr. Walton, S.M. Six charges were preferred in respect of the sale of liquor in lesser quantities than two gallons and of permitting liquor to be consumed on the premises. Inspector Martin prosecuted, and defendants were represented by Mr. Burnaru.

In the first case the company was i charged under section 80 of the Licensing Act with selling to Lawrence j L. Gill and Eric Quinn on March 15 j four glasses of liquor, such liquor being ; consumed on the premises. A plea j of not guilty was entered. Ins'pector Martin said that Lawrence j Gill who was a temporary constable, , went with Quinn to the company s j premises, where the liquor was pur- . chased and consumed on the premises. \ The constable had no difficulty m obtaining the liquor. Giilli, who stated that he was a probationer constable, gave evidence on th? lines cf the insiector's owning. After a lengthv cross-examination Mr. Burnard moved for the dismissal ot the information. The magistrate dismissed the information on the grounds that no offe " c ® undeir section 80 was disclosed, and that the police evidence was unreliable. The next charge was that of selling liquor to Gill. After the police evidence had been given Mr. Burnard said that in spite of the fact that the alleged offerees were stated to ha\e bpeti committed on March 35. March 29. and April IS, no information was .laid until May 6. Inspector Martin admitted this, but said that the company had been warned on March ?8. The magistrate said that the oflrnce was not proved and that the case would be rlismissed. M Burnard pleaded not guiltv to a further charge against the defendant; , ;,nitung l.quor to be consumed on the premises. . , idter evidence had been given by Constable Gill the magistrate sa.d the information would be dismissed for the same reasons as those given in the first TZ "I cannot see that the evidence is {my more reliable now, ' he I'lie further informations against the company, and charges against other persons, were withdrawn.