POLICE COURT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XL, Issue 9096, 1 June 1891, Page 2

POLICE COURT.

THIS DAY. Monday, Juue 1. — Before 0. C. Kettle, Esq, R.M. ALLEGED DRUNKENNESS.

Andrew McGonagle was charged with being drunk in Brougham-street on May 21. Defendant, for whom Mr Samuel appeared, pleaded not guilty. Inspector Pardy stated that the defendant; had been summoned on the information of persons who reported that they had seen defendant come out o£ the Taranaki Hotel when drunk. He called

Stephen Boothby White, who said : I am a .storekeeper. I saw McGona.le on May 21st crossing the street from Mrs Yates' to the Taranaki Hotel. I should say it was between 3 and 4 o'clock in the afternoon. I saw him again from sto 10 minuteffaf ter. I saw him crossing the street again. I waß at the Bank of New Zealand corner, and could not say if he came out of the Taranaki, but he came from the direction of the door. From McGonagle's uusteady gait and general appearance I should say he was drunk. He was not sober. That is how I can best define his state, as there are several stages of drunkenness. Mr Partington also saw McGonagle, and drew my attention to him first.

By Mr Samuel : lama member of all temperance organisations in the district. I sometimes wite to the papers, but not often. I should aay he was not sober. I do not know the definition of drunkenness. At the time I made the charge- 1 simply called the attention of the police to the fact of McGonaglo's state, with a view of their tracing where he was being supplied. I then heard that an information was laid against McGonagle, and I stated to him that I was exceedingly sorry for him. I offered to get a solicitor for him at the expense of certain persons. I suggested the name of Mr Hughes as solicitor, but I said that I would let McGonagle get you (Mr Samuel) if he liked. We only did this with a view of finding out whore McGonagle got the drink. Mr Hughes is a temperance man. I don't know if he is a member of several temperance bodies. Mr Samuel: Now, Mr White, do you call that a fair way of attaining your ends ? Witness : Yes ; I do. Mr Samuel : Then I don't ; and lam sorry your morals are so perverted as your evidence shows.

Witness stated that he considered that he was right in finding out where the man was Berved with the drink.

Mr Samuel : Are you in the pay of anyone for watching hot&lkeepers ? Witness ; No, 1 am not. Mr Pardy asked witness several questions, when the question arose as to whether the police should have laid an information against McGonagle before they did against the publican who served him. * Mr Pardy said that the police laid an information against McGonagle for drunkenness on tho information of Mr White, who afterwards went to McGonagle and offered to employ counsel for him, and thus defeat them.

His Worship said that the conduct of Mr White was certainly injudicious. Mr Samuel said that Mr White's conduot could not be in any way upheld, and oonsidoved that Mr White should leave the

John Partington staled he saw McGonagle on that day. McGonagle was not sober, but trying to get sober. He should Bay that McGonagle was not drunk. He drew Mr White's attention to McGonagle. His object in drawing White's attention was to prevent MoGonagle getting drunk, in order that McGonagle's wife and family might be provided for. McGonagle had been before the Court that morning, and was fined for drunkenness. McGonagle was nervous. By Mr Samuel: This was at 11 o'clock in the morning, and not in the afternoon. This was the evidence for the prosecution. Mr Samuel said that it was almost un^ necessary for him to call evidence, as tlie charge had not been proved. Tbe object of Mr White was certainly to get at the hotelkeepers through McGonagle, and to attain this object he ha>l gone about in this case in a moat underhand manner. Such j conduct, he considered, did more harm than good to the temperance cause. Ho then called W. H. J. Seffern, editor of Taranaki Herald, who stated that McGonagle oame to his house at 3.30 p.m, on May 21, on confidential business. He came in a cab. He wenfc down in the cab with McGonagle, and arrived at the office just before four j o'clock. McGonagle was perfectly sober, otherwise he would not have driven down with him in the cab. Sergeant Dufiin stated that he saw McGonagle about 4 o'clock on the afternoon of May 21 . He was walking steadily, and did not appear to be drunk. In witness's own mind he believed McGonagle had drink in him at the time. The reason he thought this was because he knew McGonagle was sure to have a pick-me-up after his bout the previous clay. I Mr Samuel said his client wished to state that his wife and family were not in want of food, as had been stated. His wife and family were always well supplied with necessaries of life. Mr Samuel then called I Andrew McGonagle, who stated that he had three beers on May 21 after being fined in the Court. He had no drink after 2 o'clock on May 21. George Rhind, licensee of Tarunaki Hotel, said that McGonagle came to his place on May 21. He served McGonagle I with a pint of beer. This was before dinner time. McGonaglo was quite sober. The point here ai'ose as to whether a publican can legally refuse a perfectly sober man drink on the ground that that person was an habitual drunkard. Mr Samuel stated that the licensed victuallers would like an assurance from His Worship on this point, as there were persons ivho frequented the hotels and kept repectable away. The publican would have to prove, he thought, that the man was an habitual drunkard. Victoria Holiday, barmaid at the Taranaki Hotel, stated she served McGonagle with a drink at about 2 o'clock on May 21st. McGonagle was quite sober then. This was the evidence. His Worship said that it should be the aim of all to prevent such men as defendant from obtaining drink. Mr White had certainly acted injudiciously, but he did not think the police had ' been fettered in any way. He must say that Inspector Pardy had always given him his full support in any cases of reformation or detection of crime. Mr Samuel had also expressed his opinion very fairly ou the matter of reforming these drunkards. His Worship added that as the evidence did not sustain the information, the case against McGonagle would be dismissed.

Case Dismissed. — George Rhind, licensee of the Taranaki Hotel, was charged with supplying drink to Andrew McGonagle, when drunk, on May 21.— He pleaded not guilty .-Mr Samuel, appeared for defendant. — Inspector Pardy Btated that he would ask leave to withdraw the charge, as the previousl'case, on which it hinged, had fallen through. — The case was then dismissed.

Assault. — James Murphy pleaded not guilty to assaulting Richard Clifford at tho Old Men's Refuge on May 16 — Tbe complainant stated that he was sitting down to hjs dinner when the defendant and Brown (who kept a bad woman out of tho Refuge) went out and had a Jcorero, and then Murphy, came in and struck him several times. Murphy accused him of taking vegetables out of the garden at the Refuge. — Mr James Bellringer, chairman of the Hospital and Charitable Board, and Sergt. Duffin gave evidence as to Clifford complaining of being assaulted.

On resuming at 2 o'clock, William Brown, Patrick Ryan, and defendant, all inmates of the Refuge, gave evidence for the defence.

His Worship dismissed the case on the ground that there was no strong corroboration of the complainant's story.