INTOXICATED, BUT NOT DRUNK.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18538, 8 April 1930, Page 6

INTOXICATED, BUT NOT DRUNK.

MOTOR DRIVER’S LAPSE. For being allegedly in a state of intoxication while in charge of a motor car, on the Arundel Road on April 1, Cyril Leslie Rice, Timaru, was yesterday fined £25, and had his driver’s license cancelled for two years, at a sitting of the Magistrate’s Court in Geraldine, before Mr C. R. Orr-Walker, S.M.

Constable D. Callanan (Geraldine), prosecuted, and defendant was represented by Mr A. D. Mcßae (Timaru), who entered a plea of not guilty. Constable Callanan said that at about 9.30 on the evening of April 1, he had been informed by the Postmaster at Arundel (Mr Jackman) that he (the latter), had brought to the Crown Hotel, Geraldine, from the Arundel Road, a man whom he considered to be intoxicated, and who had been in charge of a motor-car. The man alleged to be intoxicated had expressed his desire to give his car away to another man named Johnson. Constable Callanan said that he found that accused had been running his car with one bare rim. Accused had been interviewed at the Crown Hotel, and in answer to a question as to whom the car belonged he had replied, “what’s that got to do with you?” Accused was very aggressive and had slammed the door in his (Constable Callanan’s) face. Later in the evening, Constable Callanan said he was talking to Jackman at the Police Station, when accused arrived. Accused wanted to speak to Jackman, and had to be made to leave by force. Constable Callanan said that he had heard later that the accused had hired a car and gone to the Police Station at Timaru, and complained of the treatment he had received. Richard Jackman, Postmaster at Arundel, said that on the evening of April Ist accused had called to his (witness’s) house, and wanted to be driven to accommodation, but did not know where he wanted to go. Witness went to the accused’s car, and had a glass of beer there. He then drove accused, and a •‘swagger” who was with the latter, back to Geraldine. Witness then reported the incident to Constable Callanan. To Constable Callanan, witness said accused said he had given his car away. Accused seemed to be in a muddled state, and used bad language. There was a smell of liquor. The front wheel of the accused’s car had collapsed, as it had been running on the rim.

To Mr Mcßae, witness admitted he did not see accused in the car. He did not remember accused cranking his (witness’s) car, though this may have been done.

The wife of the previous witness stated that she was sure accused was intoxicated. She did not smell liquor, but judged from his manner of speech, and his appearance. William R. Johnson, farmer, Arundel, said he had followed the accused’s car, which was running with one bare rim. The car was going slowly, and finally stopped on the side of the road. There was one man in front of the car when witness came up, and one (accused) sitting in it. Accused offered to give witness the car. He did not seem to know where he was, and seemed keen to get rid of the car. Witness would value the car at about £IOO. To Mr Mcßae, witness said he would not say that accused was actually drunk.

In evidence, Constable Callanan gave similar testimony to that expressed by himself at the outset. He had taken particular notice of accused, and considered he was not drunk enough to lock up. Accused, however, was certainly under the influence of liquor.

To Mr Mcßae, witness said accused had later apologised for his conduct.

For the defence, Mr Mcßae said that accused had left Timaru at about four o’clock on a business visit to Christchurch. Accused considered he had reason to resent the manner in which Constable Callanan had approached him. Accused, however, had adopted an unwisely aggressive attitude. Accused also, did not know the house he went to, in Geraldine, to see Jackman, was that of Constable Callanan. Accused was quite confident he was capable of driving a car. Accused stated that he left Timaru for Christchurch at about four o’clock, in his car, for which he had paid £25. At Arowhenua, one of the back tyres burst, and with the assistance of a | “swagger” who had been handy, this j had been fixed. Witness “shouted” I twice, and gave the “swagger” some I money to buy two bottles of beer. The “swagger” went with accused, saying he had work to go to further north. At Temuka, they bought some pies and lemonade. The tyre required pumping at intervals, and at last came off altogether, and he headed for Jackman’s garage. However, the wheel started to become loose, so he stopped altogether. He said in a joke to Johnson, who came up. “You can have the car.” He was feeling pretty “fed up.” Witness further stated that Mrs Jackman did not open the door, as she spoke through a slide. Jackman also, could not crank his (Jackman’s) car, and this witness had done. When witness and Jackman went back to the abandoned car, the “swagger” had drunk most of the beer. Witness and Jackman finished the little that remained. Witness considered that Constable Callanan’s attitude at the Crown Hotel most offensive. Constable Callanan wanted all details before stating who he was. It was ridiculous to say he was drunk, especially the evidence of Mrs Jackman, who had not been near him, and had only a small lamp in her hand. To Constable Callanan, witness said

he had a glass of beer with Jackman. The lemonade and the car jack were mining next morning. To the Magistrate, accused said it would take him about threequarters of an hour to go to Arowhenua. He was travelling very slowly. He had used, no bad language to anyone. The Magistrate said he must come to the conclusion that accused was intoxicated, but not drunk. There could be no other explanation for his conduct. Accused admitted having drink at Arowhenua, and had passed other

hotels. There was no evidence to show how much drihk accused had taken. Evidently he had had enough to be unable to drive. It was just as well the car broke down, perhaps. This may have saved accused’s life or the life of some other person. The penalty must be made substantial, but it was not a case for imprisonment. Accused would be convicted and fined £25 and costs. The usual practice would be followed, and accused’s license would be cancelled for two years. Accused would be allowed seven days in which to pay.