A DISASTROUS DRINK.

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 12881, 13 May 1913, Page 2

A DISASTROUS DRINK.

RESULTS IN FOUR PROSECUTIONS.

DRUNKENNESS IN HOTELS

... - A drink, which wa3 partaken of on "Wednesday, April 30, was instrumental .... in securing the conviction of a man for "" tkofi\ for which he is now serving two months' imprisonment, and was responsible for lengthy proceedings at the Court yesterday, • when a publican, and his 'barmaid, were arraigned in connection with several charges of serving a drunken man, and with allowing drunkenness on the pre'raises. The caso was unique in the history of licensing cases, in that for 57 years no information has been laid " against Foster's Hotel, and that certainly, according to counsel for the defence, the reputation of the'house had been unsullied for the 25 years Foster's had been proprietors. The case against Ada Cunningham, for supplying liquor to a man already in a state of intoxication, was first called-. Mr Cohen appeared for defendant, who pleaded "Wot guilty." The facts wore, according to 'Sergeant Bourko, who prosecuted, that two men named Hindmian and Speight, both of whom recently figured in a theft case, met on tho Quay, and on the instigation of one, both adjourned to Foster's Hotel. Both were served with, liquor. The polioo arrived on the scene later. Speight was in ia perfectly helpless condition, and had to be carried out of the hotel. H<» had been to McCarthy's Hotel just previously land was in such a condition that he was refused liquor. The police pointed out that Speight was at present -serving two months' imprisonment for theft. 3t was also stated . that Hiindmtan got Speight to shout for him for the direct purpose of seeing .'. whether Speight had money on him. - : Th© experiment resulted' an, -Speight being charged with theft. William Hindman, a labourer, deposed that he cam© to Wa-nganui on April

29. He mot Speight next (afternoon in Taupo Quay. * He and Speight went into McCarthy's Hotel. The Sergeant: Did he ask for anything then? ~Mr Cohen: I object. What a, man asks for is of a conversational nature, and is not admissible as evidence. Did you' get any liquor there? —No. Why not? Mr Cohen , objected, and* the query ■was left unanswered1. "' . Whafc was the condition of Speight when ho went to McCarthy's Hotel ?— He was not walking steady. Why wasn't he walking steady?—He was like a man under the -influence of ~' ■ h«iuor. Continuing, witness said that after leaving McCarthy's Hotel, witness and Speight went direct to Foster's Hotel. Speight asked for liquor. Beer was served to Speight in a glass. The defendant bar-maid served them. A man' named John Taylor afterwards came into the bar, and they had more liquor in Speight's company. Taylor and .witness went out -and left Speight in the ■ hotel. To the Bench: I cannot say what ' Speight's condition -was. To the Sergeant: He was not quite sober. Witness said that he- suspected Speight of having robbed him, amd wont in search of a policeman. He found Constable Hitchcock. He soon afterwards saw & cab taking Speight away. • . /- Cross-examined by Mr Cohen, witness . sa.jd that when he entered the hotel, Speight pulled himseilf together and up» to, the bar. Witness did not *'■ :*;W6iiSKfer that Speight was not fit to be -^applied with liquor. " There was <noway. in 1 which he asked''for " hquor to suggest that he wias not fit to I>a supplied. When witness left the.: *«!' ibr,r. forti t£?3& #ors;, %o ; C.liis»ii^&c<rr«i■ :tBS£l -;"*S!iTbar. tho barmaid sli^uldMot-liaveriirefuis-*" f"%.. '~c<l\h\m liquor. A'- 'persoa-r.in • drink could pall; himself together-fora time aiitl deceive anyone. \ . , To Sergeant Bourke: He could not say how long they were in the bar. Sergeaint Bourke explained' that the police interviewed the bar-man at McCarthy's Hotel, and he stated that he ' had to refuse so many persons on the. day in question, for being the worse for - drink that h© could not tell whether the" men. concerned in the present case ~,. wore.among.thosQ,,refused. , John Taylor, labourer, gave evidence* to, the effect that on the afternoon on the day in question he went to the ' . public bar of-Foster's Hotel.. The last witness and Speight were in the bar. Witness purchased' a bottle of beer and returned to the wiharf. afterwards goang back to the bar. He did not see Speight clearly the first time, but the -second time witness, Hindman. and Speight had drinks together. Hind- - man .and Speight shouted for the first two drinka. When they had the second , «Inn.k witness considered that Speight was a little "tangled." He was not walking quite straight in coming up to the bar. Hindman having cominuni- , rated his suspicions concerning Speight to witness, the two went to look for a policeman, leaving Speight in the bar. Witness afterwards saw Speight ■with the constable in the right-of-way along- ... *ido Foster's Hotel about halfon-hour afterwards. From the appearance and conduct of Speight, the bar-maid had nothing to observe that he was "ftmg!ed." . . _ To Sergeant Bourke: If anvono was interested, in Speight's condiitoon there was no difficulty in observing that he was not sober. # On resuming after the-.luncheon adjournment, John Raymond, barman at • McCarthy's Hotel, deposed that during the afternoon of the date in question Hindman was in the bar in company with Speight. They came in for a <innk. Witness would not serve them. i ho rcahon why he did not serve Speight was because he was a "cadger," and was not wanted about the premises. Speight was sober at the time. To Sergt. Bourke: No one had aplirwichod him with a view to getting hiir. to modify his evidence. . Constable Hitchcock sai# ■ jfchiat W A]>nl 30 ho saw Speight and Hindman together near Foster's Hotel. Speight was ti?cn tho worse for liquor. Hind- - ..,. nu'in Appeared to be sober. Witness saw them later at 5 p.m. Qn receipt or a complaint from Hindman he went m March of Speight. He found him pitting in the bar in a huddled position. Witness touched him, and asked him «liar was the matter with him. Hie barmaid, Miss Cunningham, said: " Leave him where he is for a while, and l-o will be all right." Witness' f-aid "Th© man's drunk." She replied, "He go Ino liqaor here." Witness said1 "I \v:U anest him," to which she re__pljed -'Leave him till he sobers up." A^itncijs told her that she had no right to havf a drunken man on the premises. "Witness then arrested Speight, and earned him out of the house. ' He was hopelessly drunk. Ooss-fixsmined by Mr Cohen, witness said ihat he did .not arrest S]>ei>lit when he saw him first because he was in company with a man who was apparently sober, and because ho could have got home all right. Mr Oohen, for the defence, said that the caso was one of the most unique in the history of licensing. For 57 years not one information had been brought against Foster's Hotel, and for the 25 years while Fosters' had' been proprietors, there had certainly been no complaint. Mr Foster regarded the • business as a piece of very bad luck.

Mi- Cohen considered that the evidence for th© prosecution was very slender. The day was a Wednesday, market day, election day^ and the bar was full. The maid, it was shown by the evidence, was quit© reasomabl© in doing as she did. She was genuinely attending 'to her duties. There was nothing to suggest that Speight was intoxicated before he was supplied with liquor. Counsel contended that there was no case to answer, and that it was unnecessary to call evidence for th© defence.

The Magistrate held that there was a case to answer, and -instructed counsel to call evidence for the prosecution. Ada Cunningham, the defendant, said that she had had ten years' experience as a barmaid. She had been iat Foster's Hotel for eight -months. • Witness recounted the occurrences which lead up to the incident as previously related by tho witnesses. She stated that there was nothing to suggest to her that Speight was not fit to be supplied with liquor. Wihen Hind/man and Taylor had left tho bar, Speight left the counter and went to a- seat. He seemed to wialk tall right. Witness did not notice him stagger. About five minutes later, when she was at the other side of th© counter, she hoard Speight fall. She went up to.him and gave him water. She thought he had taken a fit, and was all. Th© policeman then came in. She bad never seem, a, iraan collapse like that before. The policeman said that the man was drunk. ■She told him that she had not served" him. The constable said that she had, and that he had been Matching for half an hour.

In .answer to Sergt. Bourke, witness said that she was flurried when the policeman came in and did not think of whiat she said when she replied to him. Two witnesses who deposed to* assisting Speight whon ho collapsed in the liar, also gave evidence bearing out defendant's ooinion that Speight" appeared to 'bo ill.

The caso was adjourned' until Friday for legal argument".