ALLEGED SUNDAY TRADING.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10612, 6 March 1896, Page 4

ALLEGED SUNDAY TRADING.

DECEIVING A PUBLICAN.

At the Police Court yesterday the licensee of ' the Terminus Hotel, Charles Goldsmith, was charged with selling drink on Sunday to two men who were not travellers. '' j Mr D. D. MaodonaliJ appeared for the de- ; fendant, who pleaded not guilty. Inspector Pardy briefly stated the particulars of the case. He said two men went into defendant's hotel, and stating that they were travellers from Port were supplied with drink. Subsequently it w»s found that they were Danodin residents, and did not live at Port at all.

John Brodie, living in Leith avenue, stated that with it friend named Thomas j?arrell he went into defendant's hotel batwoen 7 and 8 o'clock on Sun- ■ day evening. They were supplied by defendant .' with beer. They told him they had come from ' Port Chalmers. The fact was that they had left , their home at 5 o'clock, and taking a stroll down the wharf walked up town again, and called into the hotel on the way. TooMr Macdonald : When the police came in . they said to Goldsmith, "Are you busy?" Gold- • smith: "I've got two travellers "from .Port i Chalmers." One of the policemen said to wit- ■ dess, "You're not a traveller from the Port." i Witness said, "Wo are travellers from the Port." I The Eergeant 'then said something to the : effect that ho knew witness by sight. Gold- ; smith stated that the beer was paid for. The i ponce then took witness' name, and after some < demur Fwrell gave his name, Goldsmith telling I him to give his name to saTe further trouble. The ' police also asked him if there was not a prohibi- • tion order against witness, and witness replied < that there was not. When the polics said to i witness, " You are not travellers from Port," : Goldsmith remarked, "You h»ve deceived me, j then?" and they both reiterated their former statement that they were travellers from Port. ! They said that both had walked up from Port : Chalmers. They had both distinctly told Gold- | mith that they were travellers. He asked them if they were when they went into the passage, and he also asked them where they had come from } He asked them if they had slept at Port Chalmers I on the previous night, and both said that they had ; that they had walked up,, and felt dry. ! To Mr Partly : It was not true that thoy had come from Port or had slept there on the previous nizht. Thomas Farrell, carter, gave corroborative cvi- ! dence. He said that he and Brodis told Goldsmith that they came from Port, as they saw that ho was "sticking" and felt disinclined to serve ■ the beer. What they had told the hotelkeeper . wa» perfectly untrue. ' j Sergeant Gilbert deposed that when he went j into the hotel he asked Brodie if there were not a i prohibition order against him, and Brodie replied, : 1No; it is nut." The men admitted that they '. told the hotelkeeper that thoy came from Port. j Constable Martin also gave evidence, ! Mr Macdonald contender! that the hoteUceeper ; had takes reasonable precautions to ascertain if the men ware travellers or not H« called The Defendant, who stated tb.-.t during the 10 or U years th»t he iiad been a hoteikeeper bis license had never been endorsed. He had been in the present hotel for IS months, Laving prior to that kept a hotel in Ohristchurch, On the evening in question he was going out when the men canoe ' to the hotel and asked for a, drink. They .-.aid that they had walked from Port Chalmers. Witness then asked them if they i-l«pt there the night before, and they replied "Yes." AVitness thought that they might be sailors from their appearance, and asked them particularly if they were travellers. He then said to them, " Come od, then, and get your drink, for I am in a hurry to gistout." They were havicc th»ir drinks when the police came in. Witness acknowledged to the police thr.t he had sold drink to them. He never saw the two men in his life before previous to that night. Mr Carew: Did you believe that they were : travellers ? ! Witness: I did. j Mr Carew said that from the evidence the men j led the defendant to believe that they were travel- ' lers, that they came from Port Chalmers-, and that they slept there the night previous. The defendant hims«lf believed what they said was true. That being so, the case must bo dismissed. It was his (Mr Carew's) duty under the section to slate that proceedings should be taken against the purchasers of the liquor. Inspector Pardy : I deferred doing so until this • case was decided. I