THE PROHIBITION OF BARMAIDS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 12857, 28 January 1913, Page 5

THE PROHIBITION OF BARMAIDS.

SOME MUCH-DISCUSSED LEGISLA-

TION

A LEGAL ANALYSIS

(Pep> Press Association. J", - WELLINGTON, Jan. 27. The much-discussed clause passed by the Legislature last year with the view to effectively "prohibiting the employment of unregistered barmaids in licensed houses, was subjected to legal analysis in the Magistrate's Court before Dr A. McArthur, S.M., this afternoon, when John Thomas Levett -(licensee or the Adelphi Hotel), John C. Mason (Panama Hotel), M. H. ' Robertson (Commercial), and Margaret Macintosh (Royal Tiger) were charged with employing unregistered girls, in or about a bar or private bar, -in their respective houses,. 'Mr H. H. Ostler conducted the case for. the police and Mr T. M. Wilford appeared for all the defendants. The ' case ajgainfst lisvett was first taken, and a plea of not guilty was entered. Mr Ostler asked that the.information should be amended so that one offence only wojild bo Charged. He proposed to deal with the case as it related to a "private bar," and asked that the words " bar or" he struck out. Mr WJlford said that before this was done he desired to ask whether there was power to amend an information if there is no offence alleged in the first instance. He admitted that if an alternative effect was charged there would bo the right to amend. In this information he claimed that there was mo offence under the Act. He submitted that. it was impossible for a bar or private bar to exist. The only "bar" defined, in the Act was that referred to in section 4 of the Licensing Act of 1908. If no offence was alleged, then ho qould not be. put on his defence. A bar under the Act mc^ttit a place where the public could enter and purchase liquor and "opening directly on to the street." What could a private ■ har mean, when a bar was defined as I"a place which the public could enter and opening directly on to the street" i Tho Magistrate : You mean it cannot exist? Mr Wilford: There is no such thing. Mr Ostler submitted that the noint raised was not sound in law. He claimed that each information did allege an alternative offence, (1) employing unregistered girls in a public bar, and (2) employing unregistered assistance in a private bar. His Worship ruled that two offences were charged inasmuch as the words " ba.r or private bar" were used. Mr Ostler then explained that the information was laid under the following section of the Licensing Act: "After the first day of June, 1911, save as provided by this section, no female shall be employed in any capacity an or about the bar of any licensed premises at any time while the bar is open for the sale of liquor." Ho claimed that a "private bar" was a place, for the sale of liquor, not opening directly on tp a public street. Briefly, he explained the history of what are now known as "private bars." In 1893.it was made illegal in consequence- of a wave of temperance reform to have.,more than one bar in any licensed house. Then some keen legal man discovered that the definition of a bar under the Act would not cover a placo or room which did not "open directly on to a public street." The result was that come hotels now carried on 'three to five distinct hotel businesses- to all intents and purposeis for tho payment of one license fee. ' Ssrgt. Itelly said he visited a privato. !>.">• at the Adelphi Hotel on the 11th inst., when a young woman named Alberta Plum was assisting. She said fiha was not registered, that she was ~npt entitled to be registered, and that i( she had been employed in the hotel for eight or nine months. ■-. Mr Wilford: It was not a public bar under the Licensing Act. Sergt. Kelly: No, it .is a, circular bnr' divided into two—one part public, the other private. In what respect was it private?—lt is not private. Tho only " public bar" ' hi tho piaeo is marked "private." The bar in which the girl in question i was, was not private at all? —Not in the sense that you.mean. The drinks cost .more than they <k> in the other bar j(fj)urp«nce)v>;''! 'k<>'^ A>-'-;'i >'-k The'bar ittfiat i^i&fpposed to be private is .pubM^wferndotbat ..which is supposed i to. be, p,ubHp,is.. marked " private" ? —Yesl ■ Mr Ostler: Theij'' they ought to be prosecuted for having two public bars. In a brief summary, Mr Ostler reminded the Court that no unregistered females were to be employed (under the Act) in or about bars, unless they were "the wife, sister, or daughter of the publican." At this stage the hearing was adjourned until to-morrow.