DEFINING "PUBLIC BAR."

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13395, 1 June 1914, Page 4

DEFINING " PUBLIC BAR."

AN IXTEBESTIXC! DECISIOX

This morning Mr W. A. Barton, S.M.. delivered his judgment as^follows m the case "of Police..v"'; -Frank: Hkwis,. licensee of the _ t Albion hotel (^fturnarcy : — Tlic "defendant is changed, under section 30 of ".The Licensing Act Amendment Aqt, 1910,',' as amended by section 2 of "The Barmaids Registration Act. 1912," upon three separate inforniatiohs, viz.:— (l) On 21st March, 1914, at Gisborne, did permit a female, quo .Mary Orr, not being his wife, sister or daughter, and not being duly registered . as a barmaid under "The Licensing Act Amendment Act, 1910,", to serve m or about the bar of .his licensed premises at a iin\6. wlinn the bar was open lor tile sale, of liquor: (2) ori 2lst Maiden, 1914, at Gisborne, aid permit a fertiale, to wit Mary Orr, not being iris wife; sister or daughter, nor a person duly 'registered as a barmaid under "The Licensing Act Amendment Act, 1910," to servo m or about tli.e.. private bar of his licensed , premises at .;» time while the bar was open for the sale qf liquor; and -. (3) oh 21st .March, IM4, at Gisborne, did employ a lemale. Mary Orr, as a bai-maid- m or about the private bar of his licensed premises at a time while 'the bar was open for ,t lie sale of liquor, such 'temale not- being the wife, sister, or daughter of the licensee, nor a j person duly registerded as a barmaid. It was agreed* that the three :informations should be heard together. It is admitted I that the defendant is a duly licensed publican for the premises m question and that the. said Mary Orr does not come withi n either of !.|he exceptions mentioned m sub-section 3 of section 36. of. The. Licensing Act Amendment Act 19i0. The definition of public bar is: . 'public bar' of 'bar' means 'any 1 room, passage, or lobby m any licensed' premises open immediately to any : street, .highway, public place, or public thoroughfare wherein the public may enter and purchase liquors.* There may bo any number of bars on Jicenseii.- premises'; buj;, only.; one is ; allowed to open immediately on to a street,, qtc. The evidence of Sergt. Jiutton is; "I wtent to defendant's hotel on the 21st March, 1014, andy there saw m one Of the back partitions of a private bar a young, wphian named Mary Orr, ah. unregistered barniatdrserviiig 1 dtihks to customers* I examined the i place where the Hqpiiors are. sold-. -It^is an aval structure with an oval counter m tlie centre. This W(is partitioned -off with two part.it ions which were, from 7 to 8 feet high, leaving the. top of the bar an open space. These two back; partitions opened inio. a passage way which leads into what is known as the Albion Lane. There were doorways m .e&'ch; plir.titidn enabling ane s> to gqt from one. part to another. . On the date m question I found tho door leading to what is known "as the front portion of t,he bar lofekfd.' J although t K(ym sh'en It open oh other occasions. The front or 'end portion fating Gladstone road. Which I iterm the public bar, opened on; to the street— on to Gladstone roho". at one end, aqd on to the corner of Gladstone road arid Albion Lane, .on the other end, by t\yo outer tloprs from which there was a small recess of about three feet m which I" there were erected folding doors which acted as a, screen and which had neither, bar nor bolt to secure them, or fastening of any kind. Qn each window facing Gladstone road and on. those facing Albion lane there was the word 'bar.' " I will first deal with the question as to whether the room on the Gladstone road side of the partition is or is not a public bar within the meaning of the Act. The outer doors are kept open during the hours at which premises are by law open for the, sale of liquor; therefore the inner drtors simply act as a. screen to prevent •persons m the bar from being seen by the public from the street and no doubt they were placed there with that object. Persons desirious of reaching the room where liquor is sold would simply have to push open the swinging doors. "Counsel for the defencee contends m reference to the door at the corner ''of Gladstone road and, Albion lane that it does not come within fhe definition of ''public bar" or "bar" for the reason that it does not open immediately on to any street, highway, public place, or thoroughfare, inasniuch as persons desiring to enter by that floor would have to- walk over, two or three feet of private property. This piece of property has been used as a public thoroughfare without interruption for over twenty years, and there is nothing whatever to indicate that it is not part of the public street," and m thoso circumstances 1 am 1 tit opinion that this ' floor opens' <Jiv to a street. The next question for my consideration is , whether the. fact, of- there being' swinging doors a short distance from .the outer doors as already described ( precluded the room from bei ng a public bar as defined by the Act referred td., After careful consideration of <he question I have come to thocdhclusion that it does not. I airi of opinion that the room In front of the partition and facing Gladstone road opens immediately on to a street within the meaning of the Act, and Is therefore a public bar. Having decided that there is a public bar the next question for consideration is whether that portion of the premises bkhfndlhef partition is, part, of the bar. After . viewing the pVemlses I " have come to the conclusion that it* is not, and that being so it is a private bar, and as an unregistered barmaid, not coming, within any of the exceptions named, was found serving there at a time when the bar was open for. the sale of liquor, the defendant has brought himself within the .provisions pi the Act: The first information for employing an unregistered barmaid m the bar is dismissed. On the-. second, irtforihatiort the defendant vri\l be convicted, but as this: is only brought, as a fast case Irshall inflict a nominal penalty of one shilling without costs. The third information will be dismissed as it is praqtlcaly the same as No. .%'.'■ Mir Bumard said that m view of the conflict of decisions upon this particular question it appeared to him it \ybu)d be an eminently proper case fbr a statement: of cjase for the opinion of the Supreme Court. His Worship said he would give eveiy assistance, as lie thought it was desirable that the Supreme dourt slmuld be asked, for an opinion, oh the matter. He remarked, t-hat Mr McCarthy* §.M., and Mr Burgess, S.Af., look the same vie\y as he did, but Mr Frazer, 8.M., differed from them.^ . .,.. , • , ,