REASONABLE OBSERVATION.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XV, Issue 884, 14 February 1907, Page 20

REASONABLE OBSERVATION.

In the Police Court last Friday, before Mr. R. W. Dyer, S.M., Timothy O’Connor was charged that on December 15, being the licensee of the Victoria Hotel, he permitted drunkenness on his premises, and that on the same date ;he sold beer to James Moylan, a person already in a state of intoxication. Mr. J. R. Reed defended, pleading not guilty. Mr. Mays appeared for the prosecution. James Moylan, a carter, said that before lunch he and two companions had two drinks, afterwards going to the Victoria Hotel, where witness had four small glasses of beer and a quantity of soda water. About four o’clock, witness and his friends went out, but Moylan came back, and asked O’Connor for a room, as he wanted to shake the other men off. All the drinks witness had that day were six small glasses of beer. A man named Winters was in the bedroom with witness, and, after coming out, he (Moylan) made an accusation of robbery against Winters, as he had lost his money. They went to the police station with a constable, but witness could not swear that Winters took his money. Cross-examined by Mr. Reed, witness said that when he went out into the street with Winters to find a constable he was perfectly sober, and knew exactly how much of his money he had left. Witness was with his wife all the evening, wheeled a perambulator with two children in it, and had a perfect recollection of all the incidents of the day. Sergeant Hendry suggested at the Police Station that witness was under the influence < f liq-ior. but this wa.s not the case. Sergeant Hendry said that when Moylan and vv inters came to the station with Constable O’Connor the former was in a state of advanced intoxication, and was not accurate in his statement about the alleged robbery by Winters, who, when he turned his pockets out, had no money answering the description given. In the sergeant’s opinion Moylan was excited, but was in such a state that he should not have been supplied

with liquor or allowed to remain on licensed premises. To Mr. Reed witness said, that Moylan was not staggerins, and was able, to take cafe of himself.

William Keane, a Kingsland labourer, said that when he first met Moylan he did not appear to be under the influence of drink. After having four drinks in the Victoria Hotel, Moy-. lan drank soda water, saying that he did not want to get drunk, as he had to go. out with: his wife that evening. When Mr. O’Connor came into the bar, as Moylan was having his last glass of beer, he told the barmaid not to give him any more beer. In witness’ opinion, Moylan went to lie down in order to get out of drinking any more. John Keane, another member of the party, gave similar evidence. William Winters, in the course of his evidence, said he could not imagine why Moylan made a charge of robbery against him. Witness would not say that his accuser was drunk, though he appeared to be excited. Evidence was also given by Constable O Connor to the effect that Moylan was suffering from the effects of drink, and was in a muddled state.

Mr. Reed contended that there was really no case to answer, for if a publican was to be convicted on such evidence as had been given for the prosecution the position of licensees would be intolerable. On the evidence before His Worship there was not sufficient to warrant a conviction on either charge.

His Worship said that it was entirely a question of fact, and it had not been established to his satisfaction that Moylan was drunk when he was supplied with his last drink. As far as the license was concerned, he had done quite right in telling the barmaid not to give him any more when he (O’Connor) thought that he had had enough. With regard to the other charge, he was not satisfied that any person of reasonable observation would have thought that Moylan had had enough drink when the last glass was supplied. The information would therefore be dismissed.