THE LYTTELTON HOTEL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9212, 15 April 1908, Page 3

THE LYTTELTON HOTEL.

William Hartshorn, licensee of the Lyttelton Hotel, was . charged with having, on April 2 last, allowed intoxicating liquor to be supplied to Frank Austin Green, a person under eighteen years of age ; with having allowed intoxicating liquor to be supplied to the same person while in a state of intoxication j and, further, with having permitted drunkenness on his licensed premises on the date in question. Mary M'Ginn, barmaid at the Lyttelton Hotel, was charged with haying supplied the liquor in question to a person under eighteen, and in a state of intoxication. Mr Hunt apeared for both defendants, and pleaded not guilty, and Mr Fisher appeared on behalf of the landlord of the premises. Frank Austin Green eta-ted that after leaving the Mitre Hotel he went to the Canterbury Hotel, where the licensee refused to 6erve him. He then went to the Lyttelton Hotel, where he shouted for four other fellows, and had one drink himself. He could not remember what it was. He lost hie memory when in the hotel. H© went towards the railway station, and had no clear recollection of what took place till he was with the constable.

To Mr Hunt : H© did not go into any other hotel after leaving the Lyttelton. "When the policeman found him he did not lock witness up at once, but went all over the place with him. Witness had lest some money. He had four £1 notes on him at night, but in the morning he had only 8s 4d. William Watts stated that he met Green on the evening of April 2, on Norwich Quay, and went with him into the Saxon Hotel. t As soon ap the barman saw him he /rdered him out, and he went. Green would have witness take a drink, and they went to the Lyttelton Hotel, where Green shouted for som© people there whom he seemed to know. Green had a drink, and the barmaid told him he had better catch his train. Witness went with Green to the railway station, and just after he got there thi© clock struck 11. Green was " just merry." He was sick at the station. , To Mr Hunt : Witness would not say that Green was drunk when h© ©ntered the Lyttelton Hotel. Ho was perfectly quiet, though it was noticeable that he had had a drink. He walked all right to the station. Witness had not been searched for the missing £4 or £5, but was told that no suspicion attached to him. , Walter Morrison, barman at the Saxon Hotel, stated that h© saw Green enter the hotel on the evening of April 2 and saw him slightly stagger as he came in. He told him that he would get no drink there, and he went away at once. _ . To Mr 'Hunt: Green was not so drunk that a girl could have told he was drunk if he had got up to the bar before she noticed him. Campbell Ernest Brown, licensee of the Canterbury Hotel, stated that he saw Green and, he supposed, Watts enter the hotel, and noticed that Green stumbled as he crossed the doorstep. Witness followed him in and told him that he could not have any drink. Ho became slightly abusive. Witness ordered him out and he went v , William Thomas Huston-, guard on the railways, stated that about ten minutes past eleven on the night oi April 2, he saw Green lying on the station platform very drunk and vomitino- Witness put him off the station!' and he went and lay down in front of it. Green was arrested between a quarter and twenty-five rgZSm P«t eleven by Constable Wiliiam Hartshorn, called by Mr Hunt, stated that he had taken over the Lyttelton Hotel six weeks ago, and was doing all in his power to improve the character of the house. He had <riven very striot istructions to his servants, and had gone to the expense of employing an additional man to assist in supervision, When Green was supplied with drink witness was ill in bed. Mary M'Ginn, barmaid in the private bar of' the /Lyttelton Hotel, stated that Mr Hartshorn had given her very strict instructions not to supply young or drunken people. Green and some others came in shortly after half-past ten. vShe saw nothing about him to indicate that he was drunk. He was

very quiet, and left in plenty of time to catch his train. To Sergeant Ryan: Green was only about five minutes in the bar. He only had one drink. Roubon Charles Whitford gave evidenco that between ten and eleven on April 2, Green came into the Lyttelton Hotel with Watts. Green was not drunk, and, to witness, had no appearance of having had liquor. To Sergeant Ryan : Green and Watts might have been five or ten minutes in the bar. George Walklin stated that at 11.20 p.m. on April 2, he saw Green go round the corner of Norwich Quay into Canterbury "Street, Avith Constable Rings following. Green eat down on the footpath, and was sick. He got up and went along Canterbury Street and London Street, and then up Oxford Street to near the gaol. The constable was following close to him all the time, then took him into a recess by the Colonists' Hall, and "remained there about eight minutes; then took him to the station and arrested him at five minutes to twelve. To Sergeant Ryan : Witness went to the police station next morning and lodged a complaint, saying that Constable Rings ought to have locked the lad up at once when he first met him. Mr Bishop said that there was no legal defence in the whole of the charges. There was .no doubt that Green had gone into the hotel and had been supplied, and there were no such mitigating circumstances in regard to the barmaid as there had been in. the previous case. He fully recognised that in regard to such breaches or the law licensees were at the mercy of their employees, and it was surprising to him that employees would not take more trouble to take due precautions. This was not a case for an endorsement of the license, and he was very sorry for the licensee in the position in which he was placed. He was willing to give the licensee credit for every possible endeavour to run his house properly, but it was impossible to pass the offence over. He would, however, only inflict a nominal penalty. The charges of allowing liquor to be supplied to a person under age and to a person in a state of intoxication would be dismissed, and. on the charge of allowing drunkenness on the premises the licensee would be convicted and fined ss, with costs. In regard to the barmaid, there were no mitigating circumstances. She would be fined 40s and cost on the charge of supplying liquor to a person under eighteen, and 20s and costs on that of supplying a person in a stato of intoxication.