“TWO BABIES OF BEER!”

Waipa Post, Volume 49, Issue 3506, 16 August 1934, Page 5

“TWO BABIES OF BEER!”

TAKEN FROM HOTEL AFTER HOURS.

LOCAL RESIDENTS’ STORY UNCONVINCING.

Arising out of a police v.sit to the Te Awamutu Hotel on the evening of Saturday, July 14th, by Cons.la.bles J. Forsyth and a. R. Rimmer, two wellknown local, residents, Francis D. Chunn and Harold G. Daniels, were prosecuted at the Te Awamutu Court on ‘Wednesday morning, with being illegally on licensed premises after hours.

,Mr N. Johnson (Hamilton) appeared for both defendants, and entered plfcas of not guilty. ConstabTfe Forsyth sa d that in company with Constable Rimmer, on the 4a,te named he entered the hotel at approximately 7.50 p.m. They went to the office, and asked for Mr Shea, being told he was at dinner. The clerk called M-r Shea, who came out and tat once took them to the back bar, opening the door with his, own key. Standing a,t. the counter were both defendants. Shea said to them “Are you here on business?” » and Chunn replied: “Yes.” Mrs Shea was at that time behind the bar, engaged in filling a large, bottle with beer. He and Constable Rimmer went out of the bar and then down the alley-way, at the end of which they saw Chunn’s large motor truck. They kept the place under observation, being able to see the truck and also the exit from, the back bar. After five minutes they saw Chunn bring out from the bar a large bottle and put it in the back of the lor,ry; Chuuin and Daniels then drove off.

To Mr Johnson. —The large bottle would hold about a gallon of beer. He was sure it was a glass bott e. Continuing, Constable Forsyth said Chunn came to the polce station on the Monday following, and admitted that he had taken thje beer off the premises. He explained that he had gone to the hotel to see the landlord about some work that needed doing.

Constable Rimmer corroborated, a,nd added that the rear bar door was 7 ocked. When Constable Forsyth entered with Shea witness heard voices down the |a!ley-way, and went to investigate. The voices were those of two men boarders, so he returned to the door of the bar; then he walked down the alley-way with Constable Forsyth, and waited a few yards tay/ay. He heard the bar door open, and saw two men emerge. Chunn distinctly sa d to Daniels: “I tell you it’s all rightt” The large bottles are, he understood, commonly known as “babies.” The bottle that Chunn had carried was placed in the rear of the lorry, and the vehicle was driven off, Chunn driving and Daniels s'tting beside him.

Witness added that h!e was present on the Monday at the police station when Chunn came in. Chunn explained that he had had business to transact with Shea, and he admitted procuring two “babies” for ia party that it had been planned to hold on the Saturday evening—but which had been adjourned.

Mr Johnson said he wou’d not seriously contest the police ev dance, but wouid hall evidence to explain the circumstances.

Francis D. Chunn, painter and paperhanger, Te Awamutu, said before last licensing meeting Shea told him to repaper No. 4 bedroom upstairs, arjd repair sash cords, etc. On the 14th July he was in the hotel at about 5.30 p.m. to get two g’lass jars filled. Shea rem nded him that the papering had not been done, and he replied that he would see Shea later, and arrange definitely to do the work. Witness could have taken the glass jars away then, but the barmen were busy |a,nd he 'elected to pick them up later. He took Daniels a.\>ng after tea to be instructed as to the sash cords, etc. To the police.—He had been instructed weeks before to do the repapering, though he could not remember the exact date. After the police visit he accompanied Shea upstairs to see the bedroom and then he and Daniels walked out to the lorry and drove, away. He was positive he went from the bar upstairs before leaving the premises. The other defendant, Harold G. Danie’is, gave similar evidence on the main points. Chunn had told him on Saturday before going to the. hotel, that the work had to be done on the Sunday. After the police left, he accompanied Chunn and Shea upstairs, saw whait work was needed, and then told Shea they would be at work next morning.

To the police.—JHe knew what work was needed; It was a straightforward and usual job. To the Court.' —There was no need for him to enter the bar, and he could not explain why he went there. To the police.—Both large bottles were already filled when he entered the bar.

To Mr Johnson.—>M>s Shea took them irito the bar. She told them to wa ; t at ithe office for Mr Shea, but they followed her through into the bar. without protest. The Magistrate said the position was not so difficult to determine. If people so act as to involve the possibility of different interpretations being placed upon their act'ons they cannot surely blame him if he interprets them actions in his own way. When a person has occasion to go into a hotel, and instead of remaining : n the lounge continues on into the bar and is found there by the police, who see h, la,rge bott'te being filled with beer in their presence, and the proprietor enters and inquires what they are doing there, receiving the reply that they are on business, and later go upstairs, ostensibly on that business: but wbien they believe that a prosecution will result they go to the police station and explain that they had had work to do at the hotel next morn ng and ho,d merely called to receive instruction and see the work —taking the facts and circumstances into aceourft, he could only remark that the evidence was a “bit too thin” to be believed. He would impose iai fine of £1 and costs 10s upon each man.