Now He Knows THe Potency Of "Dog's Nose"

NZ Truth, Issue 1078, 22 July 1926, Page 9

Now He Knows THe Potency Of "Dog's Nose"

•' . " ■■ .'■.■.■'■-. ; i- ■ ■■ i .. - . ■•/ (From "Truth's 1 / Special Auckland Representative.)

Beer and gin is a common form of drink m some parts of, the world and go6s by the name of " Dog 's Nose. ' ', The " kick "is prompt which, when a cheap sensation is required, is responsible for its popularity. \

IT is possible that Austin Gilbert < Durban, a respectable and elderly i taxi idriver, was not aware of the" insidious kick he was imbibing when ; he took two beers- and some gins while : calling at a house at a late hour on' June 26 last. . His passengers were making merry and, with oldrfashioned hospitality, he was invited tb partake of a stirrup' cup. i But it was Durban's undoing and . \ he ■ appeared before , Magistrates' Poynton at -the lower court.- of wrongdoers, charged with being intoxicated while m. charge of a , car..-' .'■; '. '..'-, ■'. '. '^"■- ' ' '■.;'-'. More than, usual interest was shown . m the ease because Mr. Poynton had intimated that he , would punish the rJ . ' — next offender, with . V) d %^> £=Sk-j imprisonment, fines ' Csj^f^ not having the de- .^vlpy i/STv-ff sired effect. A S^h* &flßVc2i& .Lawyer .L. P. \^s»«^»^?K Leary had the case m hand for the ac- ± : . > ;•••.■ „ / cused. ; v , ■_■ , Evidence was . given by Ivan Andrew that the accused bumped into the rear of his car. just before midnight as he was turning into the New North Road: This threw Durban's • car at right angles to the tram track, and shoptly after, while the bumped and the bumpee were talking, the matter over, a trani dame along and hit the latter s car which was showing no lights, i . The jolt stirred up the taxi driver, and he drove his car, across the pavement on to a. vacant section. The car cameito a halt when it struck" a stray curbstone which was resting there, and this 1 brought it to. a halt. Such was the main story of the accident; the rest of the case depended on the important fact whether Durban: was under the, 'fluence. V One witness said he appeared to be ■■" . / i

O;K., another that he did not speak like a man m his ordinary senses. Another (would not say that he was actually drunk, but he seemed to have had a few drinks. Police evidence favored the opinion that the accused was under the influence, and would have been arrested even if .he had not been m charge of a carl V H.e: told :■ constable Annis that he had had four vh^kies;, later he amended it, to two ;b^er^s; and' two gins. , With a fairnes^tfor ;wKi c h the " majority' of the;'police are" noted, ' .' he said that Durban appeared to ; ' be ;a clean living man -but had'^\ evidently overstepped the mark. Lawyer Leary. pointed out that his client had not seen a doctor as he had .^-^ not asked for one,' and as the lawyer jVuvi ' suggested, it vis a ■-^ TRwir^ / *£*. matter of a guinea Ifeß-Ssl-rS^ JS^f out of the offen- ' '■ '...miIIL-^l— ders pocket if one mmm "" — " m^"^^^. is called. But the \ . sergeant was convinced that the accused was m a drunken condition. • ' The lawyer painstakingly addressed the bench for some minutes, admitting that his man had done a thing he had never done before, he had mixed his drinks. ' The potency of 'the mixture he had not reckoned on. It might- be. they were quick ones which are usually considered more dangerous than those taken more leasurely. he termed it a. mild case. The police bore out the opinion he had formed that Durban had never been m trouble before. .■ Sad to relate, counsel's appeal fell on deaf ears, as his address was no sooner finished than the Bench briefly said: "Seven days," adding that his license should not be cancelled N on account of the accused's good record.