BREACHES OF THE LICENSING ACT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 13979, 12 May 1913, Page 2

BREACHES OF THE LICENSING ACT.

CASKS BEFORE THE COURT. ALLEGED DRUNKENNESS ON LICENSED PREMISES. A natabcr of ca»«-s arising out of breaches of the Licensing Act were heard »c the Magistrate's Court this ■toning. The first one taken was that of the barmaid of Foster's Hotel, Ada Cunningham, for supplyng liquor to a parson already under the Influence of Honor Mr. Cohea appeared for defendant. "She feet* of the case as related by the police were that two men named lljndmaa. and Speight met on Taupe Qcay about 3.3 o and 4 p.m. on SWth of April. They went into McCarthy’s Hotel where Speight was refused liquor on account of his state. They then went to Foster's Hotel, where it is alleged the barmaid served them with liquor. Some time later the police arrived on the scene and fonnd Speight in a perfectly helpless conditio a and had to be carried to the police station in a cab. In support of his case Sergt. Bark) called William Hyndman. who, in thi course of bis evidence, said that h< came Into town two weeks ago about April 2htb. The uest day he met a man named Speight on Taupo Quay in the afternoon. After a little conversation they went to McCarthy’s Hotel. Mr. Cohen objected to the police questioning witness as to the conversation which occurred at this hotel. Continuing, witness said be bad nc liquor in the hotel. Mr Cohen still objected to any questions as to what was said in the hotel, stating that it was not evidence. Surgeanr. Burke appealed to the Magistrate, who ruled that these questions were material so as to get the condition of the man when be went to the hotel.

Finally the Sergeant asked witness what was Speight's condition when lie went into the hotel. Witness replied that be was not walking steady and was acting like a man under the influence of liquor. After leaving McCarthy’s Hotel they went direct io Foster’s Hotel and wen! to the public bar. Speight asked for liquor, witness called for beer. Speight was supplied with a brown liquor in a glass. The barmaid supplied them with liquor. A man named John Taylor came into the bar while they were having a drink. Later on. witness had several more drinks, but not with Speight. In company wiih Taylor and Speight he had some drink, who, on this occasion, paid for it. After this drink Taylor and witness left the hotel. He could not say what his condition was; be should say be was not quite sober. Cross-examined by Mr. Cohen, witness said that when he met Speight in the afternoon he was not walking straight When Speight entered the bar fc- did not look as if be was not a lit person to be supplied with Iqiuor. He would sw-ar that when Tayiot came in Speight was served with another drink. Witness could not have IoH from Speight's appearance when he |witness) left the bar, whether h< was drank or sober, but as he saw him before he thought him a little worse from liquor. Front appearance, the barmaid was right in supplying Speight with liquor. He did not take any more notice of Speight. To the police he could nor say how long he remained in the bar. hj connection with the incident in McCarthy's Hotel, the police explained that the barman at McCarthy's Hotel vas interviewed and stated that be bad to refuse so many persons for be-

lag* worse for liquor that be could not tell whether these men (witness and Speight) were among them or not. John Taylor stated that a little after four he went into Foster’s Hotel and saw Hynman and Speight in. the bar. There were two empty glasses before them, one a whisky glass and the other a pint of beer glass. When witness went into the bar the second time Speight appeared to be sober. The hree men had a drink together. They had drinks again and Speight “shoutrd." While waiting for the second Irink. Speight appeared to be a little ’tangled.” Ilyndman and witness left the bar soon afterwards. They might lave been in the bar five minutes. They then went to look for a policenan. He saw Speight in the right-of-way of Foster's Hotel, about half-an-tiour afterwards. The constable was with Speight. Speight was lying on the ground. Cross-examined by Mr. Cohen, witless said that there was nothing in Speight’s .appearance or conduct to warrant the barmaid refusing him iquor. Speight was not joining in with the conversation. To the police—Any person serving n a bar who was interested in Ipeight's condition would have no liffieulty in seeing that he was not ober. The barmaid drew the liquor .nd left to serve others, and when she et anted the money was on the -ounter. (Left sitting.)