LIQUOR CASES.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13546, 25 November 1914, Page 4

LIQUOR CASES.

-> »"- ! BREACH OF PROHIBITION ORDERS. Charges of procuring liquor on October 31, 1914, while prohibited, ., and assisting a prohibited person "(Geprgv Hall)_ to drink liquor, were preferred' against Lawrence Mawson and William Mitche]l* Swintpn at -the- Police Court this morning. The cases against Mawson were taken first. Mr Burnard appeared for accused^ who pleaded not guilty. Detective McLood said that about 11.20 p.m. on Oct. 31 last, m company with Const. Leckie, he went to the side entrance of accused's premises. The door was open and lights were binning inside. They entered, and m ..the -tor-;, ridor found* a prohibited man, named 'George Hall, dru,nk. . , They tried some of. the- doors, but they were locked. Witness knocked., and the door was opened. Witness Ment- m and found Swinton sitting on a chair, drunk. Accused was found, m another room, where he had apparently run. Ho also was drunk, and . smelt strongly of liquor. Witness said;-- "What sort of game is this -you are playing, with, two, prohibited men on' your' premises,' drunk, at this hour of the night ?", , Ac: cusedF, said : -"I am not' drinking : I am working*/ and these men ai*e with me." Hall :• was- subseqrieiitly .arrested for drunken-ijess arid for 'procuring lifiuor, A'cciised said he knew.., nothing about Hall, whose- premises adjoined aic-cusod'-v • ■'*' ■<-- '*''; To*,M'r Burnard : Hall's room was across the corridor from accused's.- Hall was knocking at the door' 'of ,',the' room where accused was , found. Mr Burnard: JTha't shoxys that Hall was- trying to get* m and accused was resisting him by locking the door?— He may have been m before and wanted to 'get back. again. Accused was was not sufficieritlv drunk to lock up, i but he -was certainly '"under the influence of iliquor. "' y r ; Mr Bui-riard : : You know liquor is used' about a dentist's premises apart from drinking? ; y , ' His Worship: Do you suggest it was the fumes % that had. rendered accused m .the 'condition he wttsfouritl m by the detective? ' '/ „".'',. „' Mr Burriard : The detective' may have confused the fumes' witli tlie ''.smell /. of liquor; m tlie rpohr. ),7 *•' .',.. "' ", Witness: I know* liquor is used about" these particular; prenlises. ;' „ -. y "Const. Leckie gave'ycori'obbrativ« evidence: He add,ed f that he heard glasses or rbottles jinking in 'the room earlier m the'"' eyeriing: '■ Swintoii down' Mihe : stairs; Witness l-ettfTri'ed .to t'lie, 'room' with ' Swifitori'; '. AccusVi'Svas", iii a' '.very niuddled "Condition - with' "drink, and went to the bericU and tried, to do^ soine • work: Witness taxed:' accused with vhaviiig: prohibited m'eii there; and.. lie •admitted it." Accused denied ."being 'drunk; arid said Swinton had been working for him. The door of a room' on the opposite, side of the passage ,was, . open, arid Hall was .thera-. very driink. ".Witness) later on, iri company with 'Detective McLeod, returned to the pre . 'mises,... He -.arrested Hall at 12i20 that night, y -. . ... -.:.. •' , ..-■■■• '' . To-. Mr- Burnard: Accused had not ob- - served.; Ms order well. 'Witness had had frequent., complaints about accused's drinking habits. . ...'. Mr Burnard said tho case against accused was basod-on a 'misapprehension.. There was no evidence that he, assisted Hall to drink liquor. -■'• The fact "that; a' man was found drunk <. was no proof, that he procured liquor within the' * meaniu«' of.'tlie Act.. -*•*. .y His, Worship: Then somebbdy must have poured the liquor down his- throat. ' (Laughter;) '. . ' .».'••-' Mr ißu rnard : There are a variety of explanations. -He said there was mo.; proof i that *. accused * had -actively - pro-* : cured- liquor, wkio-I.'- must be dono to support a. criminal- charge. - Defendant . felt;- the matter.-: strongly. * His reputation was -at stakes and if lie were convicted,'it meant: his business was gone. George. Edward -Bitllj. landlord' of the < premises m question, said ho. had had occasion to.: observe accused. He had frequently, visited the premises, and on no occasion . had he observed drink on accused..'. or- the .premises, except the back . lavatory, 'which was used by all tho tenants. His Worship : At what hours did you go there?— -In tho morning' arid up to as late a5. 9. 30 at- night. To Senior-Sergeant -H-utton : "Witness hadi visited. the place on {Saturday -nights, but < not; -on. the. Saturday night "m question; y ' ...... -'.■■-•■' ■■ - His Worship : When did you cease to payi visits On Saturday nights?— About six weeks ago. : ; , ■■'•..■ T Helena (Mrs) Edwards, nurse,- said' she '• was? at accused's premises between 8 and 9 p f m« on October She went' -with her , daughter- to- "get -her teeth. v , TRey were there- fully 20 hijritites. '- : -Accused did riot* appear- to bo under the ittfliience of liquor 1 , and did not -smell- of .-liquor: His ■ Worship : He 'had plenty 'of tiriie to get liquor- between 9 o'clook and 11.20. ,Mr Burnard: No doubt;' : Evelyn* May (Mrs), Connor, daughter of -the- last- -witness, gave similar evidence.—To .Senior-Sergt. * .Hutton : Witness saw rio other' man' -1 - there*. -„"•'■ Har/ild:' Arthur Armstrong, chemist, saidi he/kriew accused' very well,. He saw Mm- at; 6-,p.rii. on October 31,- when he was!*juite sober. Ho saw, him practically every da-y/'and frequently m the, evenings, 'Accused bad been perfectly sober for , at ieast ; :,moiiths • kince he took tlie last order but. ' '■ . 'Mrßip-hard;: Docs, he appear to. you to be honestly to obsci-vo the order '(-—Yes. , ! \ Witness; said he frequently went to'ttccusfid's rooin "to '."use instruments. „ .. " "',;' "• Accused .gave evidence that he had observed the; order.- .'. i. His" Worship :; x Haven't you had any liquor- si'flcef-^N'o.^ ;' ,' ; His Worship: ,oo ypu wish mo to believe :.tbat Z-f^r , have 6bseryed • the order,". . To IV^iJ Burp'ard: .-He,.na4v'no liquor -pn October 31,;,ap4- b e „liacl v eijieypr\ assisted Hall tp, prjuctjre fpr drink, liquor. : He Vised a fairly I^-rgp q'uantj^y ,of alcpjhbl at the surgery. ■- k . -...-..-..•., „• : His. Worship : What; do you use it for? — Cleaning .*. ins,trumenjts and-., djasolyulg. .Were. yoU „u&i|ig.,*i.ii, that higi[it'?7r-Xps. .cleaning instr^mienits. .. , '= ". „~ ■'.- ..To Senior-Sqm^'Hutton; Swinton had 'been ''assisting rjifmy >.iHe was, the ac-. countant. There was "no sigh of 'liquor oil Swinton., Witness was vi the hospital a few week^-ago, arid even the'doctors did not., know, .wha^ he .was. suffering from. -•It was not the cause> of drink.' ' , William Mitdhell Sainton, c'lei'kj said ho was assisting, accused. , , ...... His Worship: At 20 pdst UT— Well; thero was one. night wo were there till midnight. Witness said there was a lot off- hack-work to fdo.; - He^ denied [being under -'iho iriflueiico/ of liquor oir the riiglit of Oiilolier '31. " ,Mr BjUi-nard : Did you hivb'any liquor thitt; d.dy?-^Sfo. ' * ;;* , ,' „ " •;. ' ,?,■ \y- His Worship : You say you had 'no liquoi'?-7l was not un,dei* ( 'lhe influence of liquor. ..';'"' / "' .. \ , Do' you wish me to believe, you had no liquor i'thkt day,?— To tl'Pabest of nnity t belief I 'had nofe .. - , . '„ „,, " . To ' J Senipr-.Ser_t.* Hutton : Tlie reason the door' V/as loc*ied ; was to ' keep HaU ont - i-'X ' \.i ''.'.' I ' ..■< .•'•" • „. ," His Worship : Not the police? — No, as soon as t^e^pdUco knocked the door. -was opened^immediately. '' , ' ' ! . His -Worship £ Very considerate of y° l '- " . ' " ' ''' '■>,:. -,'■ ') To Semor-Sergt. Hutton : It Avas not a fact that, he had .liqvfoif.j that -,daj. Hall was uncle'r and, be was annoying slp,wsqn,, They were, hot driving .with, Hail. , v , r-ir . '■■ His .Worship. ( "sp,idju.' reference 'to the cha.rge pf assisting Hall toy dr,ii}k" there was not, sufficient, e'yideh'ce* tor.Sjfarraii^. a 'co^yicti'bflu'.'i .'-'ln, ' rej*ei % ence to thp charge .pf procuring Uauov,,'."'.. sajd Hitf Worship,, '% am perfectly, satisfied., from the evidence that the. charge. -.has been •f^lly prpyed.. liptii accused, and. S\yin r loii havQ^cpme here and wilful and corrupt .perjiu-y, ot-^hat T I.-have not' the. slightest db^uht.. These. ai'e difficult cases^." to prove,,' and when t)iey aro proved it is riecessary to impose a substantial penalty.'' ..Had accused come here aiid admitted the ..charge, I .shoiuid have ,that "iinto ' consideration . '.'., , ' Accuse ( 4 . jyajs J((hed .£& -ap4- ' C R^ fl s * * n default' o^e'^pnt*^^ The 'charges against "" Swinton ' Were then procaecled with. It was agreed to admit tho evidence given m tho other caso.

His Worship said his-remarks applied equally to this- accused. '. In reply to His WorsMp, Senior-Sergt. Hutton -said unfortunately accused had not observed hislo^der. Mi\ Burnard saict ,it was true drink was accusejd's trouble. He was an older man than'rMawson, and -it was. not, so easy, for hihrv to , pull himself ' together. ffis i; Wqrs}iip: -IJiiis just as. 'easy ..for an old ' ma'njFo.'tet. 'the" truth' as a yoring man. " A, similar fine as m the other case was imposed. , Mr. ; Burnard asked for tiriie to pay. His .Worship said' accused were .riot entitled to any corisideration at all, but he gave them until, this afternoon to i )a y- '.' y. ■■'"...'■":" /;"' .;" . ..' -. -> i BI _____ B _____g