LEGAL & MAGISTERIAL NOTES

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume X, Issue 471, 3 August 1899, Page 19

LEGAL & MAGISTERIAL NOTES

The defence raised to charge of Sunday liquor selling preferred against the licensee of the Shamrock Hotel was that the person who ordered the drinks had paid for a bed on the previous night, and was therefore considered a lodger. Mr Carew, S.M., in imposing a fine of £3, held that the fact of a man enquiring for a bed did not constitute him a lodger All he contracted for was to have a room kept for an occupant that night. The Magistrate added that he thought even if the man were a lodger he could only be supplied for his own personal drinking. The decision is important to hotelkeepers. Mr Jas. Dabinett, licensed owner of the Tariki Hotel, Taranaki, was charged under section 128 of the Licensing Act of 1881 withallowing his dining-room to be used for a progressive euchre party on Saturday. June 14. The police evidence showed that a euchre party was carried on openly and above board till about 11 p.m. That this party was got up by the Caledonian Society in the interest of the prize fund for sports of that Society, and to clear a new course. That the landlord, Mr Dabinett, had made no charge fer the room, and that the players in the euchre party paid 2s fid each towards the fund of the Society, some sixteen or seventeen people playing. The party was the second which had been held in the same place, and for the same object. The 2s fid was paid merely for the privilege of playing, and not in the interests of the landlord. Mr S. Weston, for defendant, and Mr Richmond, on behalf of mortgagees of premises, addressed the Court, contending that the facts

proved did not disclose any offence, and the S.M., Mr Stanford, dismissed the information, stating that had the licensee permitted the use of the room exclusively, he would have come under the latter part of section 128. Had he himself charged 2s 6d as an entrance fee to the room, he would have broken the law ; but, as the money was only paid to the president of the Caledonian Society for taking part in a game of euchre for the benefit of the Sports Committee of that Society, a matter in which the licensee had no interest, and as the public was not excluded from the room no offence against the Licensing Act had been committed.

At the Paeroa Police Court on Thursday, John Lea Stevens, licensee of the Stirling Hotel at Waihi, was charged, on the information of the police, with having supplied a man named Edward Donnelly with liquor on Sunday, July 9. From the evidence submitted, it appears that Mr Stevens had at the rear of his hotel, several small rooms, which he rented to miners, one of these being let to the Donnelly brothers. Being part of the licensed premises, Mr Stevens considered the occupants in the same relation as boarders, and allowed liquor to be supplied to them at any time. Recently, however, Mr Stevens caused a summons to be served on Edward Donnelly for 9s, alleged to be due to the hotelkeeper, and on the Sunday following the receipt of the summons Donnelly took another man, who thought Donnelly was a boarder, into the hotel to have a drink, and the drinks were served by Mrs Stevens, wife of the licensee. Donnelly paid for the drinks, and also took away two bottles of beer. On the following day Donnelly went to the hotel and asked Stevens if, he was going to continue the prosecution for debt, and the latter having said “Yes,” Donnelly interjected, “ Then, in that case, I will lay an information against you for Sunday trading.” This he did, and took the bottles of beer to the police to support the complaint. Donnelly stated that he had left Stevens’ rooms a month before, though Mr Stevens had not been aware of it, especially as Donnelly’s brother continued the room and paid for it. The defence was that both Mr and Mrs Stevens thought as Donnelly was a lodger on the day in question they were justified in serving him with liquor. Mr R. S. Bush, S.M., however, held that it was the duty of the licensee to know who were actually lodgers in his house, and the evidence showed that a breach of the law had been committed, even under the circumstances mentioned. Mr Stevens would, therefore, be fined £l, and costs £3 10s 6d, besides which an endorsement would be placed on his license.