PATEA SM. COURT

Patea Mail, Volume XLIX, 26 November 1928, Page 2

PATEA SM. COURT

OIiDIXAIIY tsJTTiXC. The ordinary monthly silting of the ,I’atea HAL Court, was held on Kriilay before Air. J. is. Barton. HAL when the following eases were dealt with; CIVJ I. CASKS. •Judgment by dt fault was given us' uador;— i’aiea Harbour Boaid \'. J. Bourke, claims Jin' V.i .ItSs '.at anil hi Ids -Id; wir. butheifo.d for plaintiffs. (). Aletili s', Hoskin. elaiiu for JOs; Air. liulherford for plaintiff. Hb’r.ACHL.s OK LICK MSI NO ACT. i-'rank Simpson, been ee of the Alton Hotel, who was eharged and cunsietud at a previous sitting of the I'ourt with selling liquor during the iime at which his premises were required to lie closed, came up to show cause why his license should not be endorsed. Air, Huston appeared on behalf of the defendant and urged in mitigation Kail his client eras not present ia the hotel w hen Ihe previous oJfence for which he had been charged was committed. Counsel stated that at caeh of the annual licensing mootings the reports of the police and others went to show that the house was well conducted and satisfactory in every way. He.eiidaat- was a good type of publican tind His Worship could rely on him conducting his house in good order in future. His Worship said the re were two elements io regard to the oil once in his mind, one was the previous conviction, therefore the offence must be limited as deliberate. The second element was the danger of supplying liquor to motorists after hours. He took into account the fact that there was no moral blame attached lo defendant in the former case. The public did not realise the danger of supplying liquor to motorists after hours. In his small district in October last there were no less than Jive convictions of motorists intoxicated in charge of cars. In two of these eases injuries had been suffered by innocent persons. He did not propose to endorse the -defendant's license at present, but would order him on the charge of exposing liquor to come up for sentence when called upon. Upon each of the two charges of selling liquor during prohibited hours lie would bo linetl £7 10s and costs.

Three Alton residents were charged with being found on licensed premises when such premises were required to be closed and also with abetting the licensee in the commission of an offence —to wit to sell liquor on premises when same -were required to be closed. Constable Kelly gave evidence to the effect that he had visited the Alton Hotel at 9.15 p.m. on October 12, last, when lie found defendants on the premises with liquor before them. On the charge of being found on licensed premises they were lined £2 and costs. With regard to the charges of aiding and abetting the informations were dismissed. Ernest Wooliright, license of the Albion Hotel, was charged with selling liquor at a time when the premises should be closed and also with opening such promises when same should Inclosed. Hi". Huthorford appeared on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded guilty. Constable Kelly gave evidence to hearing voices in the bar at about i).20 on October dO. On entering the hotel lie found a man with two bottles of stout coming awjay from the bar. He stated he had jmrehased these at’ !S o’clock that morning and tvas taking 'tnem home. Mr Jtutherford said it was doubtful if there was an offence as the liquor was paid for earlier in the day. His Worship said counsel was up against the High Court of .Britain, which declared that the sale of liquor was on the same footing as the sale of sock's and Hoar, ''flu; delivery of Ihe liquor was an act of sale.

Defendant would be convicted and lined J-5 and costs. Tim second charge was ■ withdrawn by leave of the court. William Ayling was charged with aiding and abetting- iu the opening of licensed premises at a time when they were required to bo closed, and also with selling liquor pt a time when the premises were required to be closed. Air. .Butherford appeared for the defendant. who pleaded not guilty. Constable Kelly gave evidence to the effect that on October ,‘!0 at ft.JO p.m. he saw defendant coming out of the bar carrying a tray with six glasses of beer and six of stout. On being ashed who they were for he said they were for boarders upstairs. Accused, on being asked, said one was a boarder and ho did not know who the others wore. The llc-cnseo said ho did not know whom the liquor was for. On witness leaving the bar a number of men rushed out of the sitting room and ran away. Defendant was barman at the hotel. After hearing counsel His Worship convicted accused ou the charge ol aiding and allotting in the opening of licensed promises for the sale of liquor and lined him £5 and costs 10s. The second information was dismissed. APPLICATION FOB BKIIKABJXG. Air. Eutherfurd. ou behalf of Air. J. A. Alaudcrson, applied for a rehearing of the charge of failing to keep a wages book on the ground that- ho had not limited the law, as il appeared from the evidence. Tho wages book, it had been claimed. had not been written up since December. but this was a mistake. It was true >t had not been written up as it should tune .’been. Defendant claimed (hat he had never ‘been warn-

ed as claimed by the inspect or. Inspector Gohns ; who appeared on behalf of the Department, read a copy of a letter he had sent to the defendant on December 12 last. Xo entry had been made in the wages book since June 30, 1 bits. Mis Worship said the letter produced was evidence that the letter had 'been sent. He considered the grounds brought forward did not warrant the rehearing of the case, and the application would accordingly bo refused.