MOTORIST FINED £15

Southland Times, Issue 23675, 25 November 1938, Page 7

MOTORIST FINED £15

Intoxication Charge LICENCE CANCELLED FOR ONE YEAR A fine of £l5, in default seven days’ imprisonment, was imposed on a labourer, Ernest Beaman, aged 52 of Invercargill, when he appealed before Mr R. C. Abernethy, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court at Bluff yesterday on a charge of intoxication while in charge of a motor-car. He was ordered to pay costs £2 5/6 and his licence was cancelled for one year. The accused was allowed two months in which to pay the fine.

Sergeant D. W. Black conducted the case for the police and Mr J. Tait (Invercargill) represented the accused, who pleaded guilty. “Sergeant Black said the accused arrived at Bluff about 11 a.m. on November 21 and met a friend at the port. They had a few drinks at a hotel. Beaman had parked his car a little distance from the hotel and when he and his friend approached the car to drive to Argyle Park he was advised not to take the wheel. The accused drove the car about 300 yards, however, and was travelling on the wrong side of the street to the confusion of traffic. In so doing he narrowly escaped being involved in a collision. A friend of the accused then took the wheel. On the return from the park, Constable B. S. Parkes approached the car. Beaman was then sitting next to the driver and was obviously in no fit state to be in charge of a car. The accused was a returned soldier. For the defence Mr Tait said the accused was an Australian returned soldier. In Bluff he had met a soldier friend, who was also an Australian, and they had a comparatively mild reunion celebration at a hotel. Counsel pointed out that it was not the Australian friend who later drove the car, but an acquaintance whom Beaman was intending to give a “lift” into the city. The accused had been driving a car for more than 30 years, said Mr Tait, and he had never had an accident, nor had he had occasion to appear before the Court. Some time ago, he had suffered a breakdown in health and he had s<ime difficulty about his Australian pension. His wife had to help in supporting the family. The car was purchased and his wife travelled and sold some particular products. Hie accused came to Bluff when he was fit, in an effort to obtain employment. “My client tells me that when he climbed into the car he did not feel the effects of the liquor he had taken, but when he was driving he became more aware of his condition,” continued counsel. “He then agreed to let his friend drive. His friend, however, was not used to small cars and the accused was showing him the use of the gears and the choke when the collision almost occurred.” “It is common knowledge that the Court hates dealing with these cases because usually there are otherwise decent citizens appearing in the box,” remarked the Magistrate. “It is because of the danger of the offence that the Court is compelled to regard it seriously. Like most other Magistrates, I have felt myself forced to impose imprisonment unless sufficient reason is shown why I should not I will take into consideration, in fixing the penalty, the fact that you handed over the car when you nearly had a collision—it was late enough—and also that the possibility of an accident was the result not so much of your condition as your being engrossed in explaining the controls.”