The Licensing Law.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 84, 2 November 1918, Page 3

The Licensing Law.

MOUNT EGMONT HOTEL CASE. (Before Mr A. Crooke, S.M.) , Several breaches of tlie licensing law were preferred against Catherine Enwright, licensee of the Mt. Egmonfc Hotel, Midhirst, yesterday. Five men, P. Phelan, A. Coble, A. Hignett, R. W. McDonald, and T. A. Mason, were charged with being unlawfully on the premises of the Mt. Egmont Hotel after hours on sth October.

The cases against the licensee., and against the men were taken simultaneously

Mr A. Coleman appeared for Mrs. Enwriglit, the licensee. \ Mr J. R. L. Stanford represented ( Phelan, Oohle, and Hignett. McDonald pleaded guilty, and wan fined 10s and costs. , [ Sergeant Dale proceeded to give evidence in the other cases. He said tliat on sth October he visited the Mt. Egmont Hotel at Constables 'Robertson and : Tiza'fd a'ceompanied him. The front bar was closed, and the front private entranco open. He sent Constable Robertson to the back of the premises, and himself and Constable Tissard entered the private entrance. The passageway was lighted up, and at the door | he met a man named Barlow, who was a stock dealer, and said he was) a lodger. Witness proceeded along the passage, turned to "the left, audi saw in a room in front of him McDonald and Mason. They pushed the) slide up about nine inches' and were sneaking to someone in the bar. At that time Constable Robertson came in tho back, and witness directed him to pay attention" to those two men. Turning again to the left he came, into a room adjoining the bar. That ( room was also lighted up, and theslide was up a» far as it could go. He could see into the bar. and see| the liquor on the shelves. The licen- 1 seo'» daughter wa N s in the bar, and | she had a small kerosene lamp. On the shelf of the slide, there was'a whisky J bottle and an empty glass. In tho ( room he found Phelan standing near the slide. Hignett a man named. ..Go,ble, When asked ,for an explana- t j tion, Phelan said "I was invited, and, J had one shandy with Miss I Hignett said he was invited and had; a few pqny shandy gaffs, but did not ■ pay for them himself. Goble also said he was invited, and that lie had a.' 'shandy, for which he paid. Witness} : told Miss Enwr.ight to bring her mother. And he asked the latter why the men were there, and thej bar open. She replied: They are onlyj a few guests I invited here. I told i .Kate that it does not matter who comes to-night as they are giving a send'.' off> they > can l have something if, they .come." He asked Mrs .Enwright if' she went and invited people off the street on to the premises • after hours. She replied: I did not invite them Sergeant. I did

not. say that I invited these men to ; a farewell at my hotel. The farewell I was to be held in the hall. I told my daughter that s he could give any men who came to the hotel, a drink." He said to Mrs Enwright that her daughter evidently knew she was doing -wrong and she replied: "Yes, I I suppose, it was Wrong, she should not have been there." The whole .'place was lit up and the front bar door was closed. To Mr Coleman: Ho took a no to of the conversations when he got .back to the ..police station", and Constable I Tizard made notes'at the time.

To Mr Stanford: Miss Enwright brought the lamp out of the bar..He would swear to Hignett's reply. He may have asked Coble who paid for the drink. He did not know how long it was between the arrival- of the men from Stratford and his arrival in Midhirst. They did not tell him why they went into th© hotel, but on visiting the hotel in connection with the case be heard a story which they did not toll him at the time of the visit. Constable Eohprtsou deposed . that McDonald said they had not been supplied with drinks and that he had been a boarder up to the previous, night. He said he had asked for a drink, but it had not been supplied. Mason said he was a boarder also, but intended to sleep in a whare with McDonald that night. When Mason was served with a subpoena, he said ■he had been a /hoarder in the bote!. When asked why he did not toll that previously, he said be was in a l>»t of a muddle. ;

Mason whoso capo had previously been culled on, appeared at this juncture. He pleaded not guilty, fie did net, gee any light in the Bar. There wtTo no glasses on the slide. To Mr Stanford: The police, went out in a motor ear. He did not remember -seeing, the men, in town that evening. He was positive that Gobi» did not tell him that his (Coble's) .statement was wrong, explaining that he said he paid for his v drink because he thought they had be\tn** , frcus.>d of

shouting. ,Mason put several questions to the constable.

Constable Tizard corroborated previous evidence. The names of Barlow, Mason, and McDonald were not in the bedroom book. To Mr Coleman: He did not see any light in the bar.

Mr Coleman said the facts were very much as the police bad given them—with some important exceptions. It bed been dee'ded (~, giro Harlow and Hignc- t, : i ho were broth-ers-in-law, and who are going into camp, a send off on sth Oct tber. B"r----low had been living r* the Hotel. On the night of the filrewe.ll eiroumkept them in Stratford rather later than tliay expected. It

wa& about nine o'clock when they left

and they were in a hurry to get to the function'. Goble was a cousin of the men, and Ehelan was tlie licensee

of the Commercial Hotel. On their' way to Midhirst they were stopped by a woman, Mrs llasmusson, who told them that her child was ill, and asked them to ring for the doctor. They were then about one mile from the Hotel, and proceeded on as it was the nearest. On arrival Hignett ami Barlow went in, Hignett to deliver the telephone message, and Barlow to get some things. Phelan was talking to a man outside, and Goble remained in, the car. Shortly Miss Enwright, daughter of the licensee, came to the door and saw Phelan and Goble. They were acquaintances of hers, and she invited them to have a drink whilst! waiting. Shortly before the car arrived, the lam,p in one of the rooms' exploded. The only access to the! bar wa fi through the B lide, a half-door, also had to be unlocked. Miss. Enwright went for the keys to her J mother, who was not aware the men Avere there- The private parlour was in darkness, and with the exception of the room where M«spn and McDonald were, only the bar parlour was available; they entered the latter, j .The Magistrate said that if men went into a hotel after hours for the purpose of getting a drink, they were' ( ' on the premises unlawfully. , Mr Coleman contended that a landlord was perfectly entitled to enter-' tain Id's guests. J The Magistrate referred to an Eng-i

lish case on which he based his con- (

tention. j Mr Coleman pointed out that in the present case the men were friends o, • the family, and were not casual visitors. Phelan was a publican, and could get all the drink he wanted at his own place. j The Magistrate: He might like a change of liquor. j Mr Coleman said the men were there through an accidental set ot; circumstances. It could not he held that the object of the licensee was in-' directly to obtain benefit by keeping up trade connection. Hignett and Barlow were going to camp, and Coble lived on the other side of Stratford, and was not often in Midhirst. If the lighting system had not broken down they would not have used the bar. parlour, which was the only room available, seeing that Mason and MeI Donald were in the only other room ; that could be used. There was a conflict of evidence, and the defendant, was entitled to the benefit. Counsel J. quoted English a nd Dominion authorI itios at length in support of'his argument. Mr Stanford also addressed His Worship, and cited previous cases | bearing on the question. % I Catherine Enwright, who said she assisted her mother, the licensee ot the Mt. Egmont Hotel, gave support. f ing Wlde'nc'e'afe' to the trouble with the lamp, and the arrival of the car. Phelan, Hignett, Barlow and Coble were in the car. Barlow and Hignett asked permission to use the 'phone. The men had been personal friends of , the family for some time. The other two stood talking on the verandah. She asked them to have a drink, ana went to her mother, told her who the ! men were, and asked permission to i give them a drink. She obtained the . keys, took the men into the bar parlour, opened the bar, and nerved the drinks. Barlow did not have a drink. They had only just put down the glasses when the police came in. The j drinks,were not paid for. The slide ■ had to bo opened in order to get into the bar. She put a hand lamp I on the table in the parlor. She did j not take a lamp into the bar. She ' did most of the work, and would be able to obtain almost anything in darkness. She did not remember ex-j actly what the Sergeant said. She called her mother at his request. They had not been troubled by the police before. ! To Mr Stanford: They had only the one drink. Nobody paid any money. Sergeant Dale: Goble has sworn that he paid for hi s own drink. Continuing: There was no money passed. She did not hear her mother tell Sergeant Dale that she did not know Phelan wag there. She did not come out of the bar with a lamp. There was no whisky bottle on the slide, but there may have been , a glass. Patrick Phelan said on the Thursday previous l they arranged to make the trip. The others were Hignett, Goble (owner of the car) and Barlow. He supported the statement about being asked to obtain medical assistance. Hignett promised to do so. On arrival Hignett and Barlow went into the hotel. Other statements were similar to previous evidence. There was no light in the bar. ! To Sergeant Dale: The send-off to Barlow was to-take place in the Hall at eight o'clock. ; Alfred Goble, Cardiff, gave evidence'as to the arrival at the'hotel. Barlow said he had to go upstairs, and Hignett went to use the telephone. Witness and Phelan were later invited in. Witness was a bit excited when he told the police that lie paid for his drink. He thought they were trying to find out if there was any shouting. He told Copst-able Robert*j son the day Barlow and Hignett went : to camp that ho (witness) had made j a mistake in saying he paid for his j drink. j To Sergeant Dale: He did not know of any arrangements between the jvir- j ty and Mrs Enwright as to calling j

at the Hotel. Witness had no intention of going to the Hole! lor a drink. It was solely on account ol the telephone message fchat the;/ eadod there.

Constable Robertson was re-eallea regarding the statement of Goble that he told him (Robertson) that the explanation to the Sergeant was wrong. The witness said that he remembered speaking to Goble, but had no recollection of the statement about the explanation. Catherine, Enwright, licensee of the Hotel, also gave evidence. She bad been in the hotel business twentyseven years, and had never previously had an information against her. She had four sons, who went to the front, one having been killed, ami one bad returned. To Sergeant Dale: She knew that some men were coming, Barlow having said that he might bring, some friends.

The Magistrate said that the daughter of the licensee, knowing the men, had invited them in to have liqour, after having obtained her mother's permission, and served them gratuitously. The only evidence of a natural sale was the indirect evidence of the transaction with Goble. Sergeant Dale stated tiisit Goble said he paid, afterwards, he said he made a mistake, and apparently had spoken to the constable. The latter said he did not recollect the explanation being given, and also had given it as his opinion that Goble would not wilfully tell a lie. On the whole, he was inclined to accept Goble's statement. He. bore a good reputation, and maybe, he had made the statement to the Sergeant in order to excuse himself, when he thought he was charged with a breach of the anti-shouting law. The case was full of suspicion, but ho did not like to convict on suspicion. Accordingly, be thought he was justified in nig the information against the licensee. The case against the men was quite different. He did not think there was any need, for Hignett to go in. Goble and Phelan went in foi the purpose of having a drink, and that seemed to come within the section.

The men were fined 10s each, with costs 7s.