Western Daily Press - 05 June 1901

CLAIM BY PAULTON LICENSEE.

At Bristol country court yesterday, Alfred Hubert Payne, licensee of the Lamb Inn, Paulton sued Captain Albert Adams, of The Laurels, Paulton, to recover £34 for beer, cider, cigars, &c. supplied, and money lent in a period extending over two years.

J. G. Sandford appeared far the plaintiff, and Mr Douglas Metcalfe (instructed by Harold Osborne) defended.

Mr Sandford, in opening the case, said the plaintiffs wife carried on the business, and much of the liquor bad been handed over the garden wall, defendant, a retired army captain, living in a house the grounds of which were separated from plaintiffs by the wall. Payments had been made on account, and now the defence of the Tippling Act was set up. The liquor had been supplied to defendant, his three sons, and his household.

Plaintiff went into the box and produced the account.

The Judge: I see eleven quarts here in one day.

Witness: That is the account for a month, sir.

Mr Metcalfe: £3 for beer alone in November.

Witness said defendant asked him to supply his sons over the garden wall when they were at work the garden. He bad lent defendant 20s once, and defendant had had meals at the Lamb - oyster suppers &c. Defendant did not object to the bill when it was rendered, but paid sums on account.

Cross-examined by Mr Metcalfe: Defendant was away from Paulton nearly all November and all December, 1899. Practically the order for the sons was unlimited. No champagne was supplied, nor water. (Laughter.) Foe those two months about £5 worth of stuff was supplied the over wall — beer and stout chiefly —in 3d and 6d worths. It used to be put on the top of the wall, and they took it. He knew that one of sons was under age and other was 30 or 31; they were not only two — there wee third beginning who was also supplied. Witness did not follow George (the youngest) to Bristol when he was leaving for Canada, but he happened to meet him. He did not get 10s from him then on account of a debt of £3 10s but he had a promissory note for £3 from the brother.

Cross-examination continued: Defendant did not say would pay his sons' account of £5 or so, and that witness must not supply them again without written orders. Some written orders were given but they were in the nature of freaks.

The Judge said most the orders appeared to be of a humorous description.

Cross-examination resumed: He had never given away a drink to his friends and charged it to Captain Adams. A brandy and soda ready drawn and a claret and lemonade were often handed over the wall, but not oyster breakfasts, luncheons, and teas. They had tea and oysters.

The Judge: Tea and oysters sounds horrible, (Laughter.)

Witness said defendant often had food at Lamb, Captain Adams used to bring in people to drink for the mere purpose drinking.

Mr Metcalfe: I see you charge for one day, 11 quarts of cider, eight quarts of stout, five quarts of beer, three large brandies and sodas, 1s 1 1/2d worth of whisky, 2s 3d worth of brandy, a brandy and lemonade, a brandy and whisky mixed, and then you lent him three sums of 2s, 6s, and 3s. Was he in a fit state to be lent money after that? — He had it whether he was fit or not. The liquor wee not supplied on one day.

Witness explained a "dry season from December, 1899, to July, 1900, by saying that Captain Adam was a teetotaler.

Mr Metcalfe: I wonder that didn't ruin you.

Witness said he had advanced money to the youngest son, now in Canada, on various articles, a wheelbarrow included, but not jewellery. Captain Adams did bring a policeman to inquire how witness had got possession of the articles. He made the advances to protect Capt. Adams.

Mr Metcalfe: Do you remember October th? - Yes.

Was that a great brandy day? I tall too why I ask, because you charge brandy 1s, 1s, 1s 9d, 6d, and so on, 9s 6d worth of brandy in one day? - Not in one day.

The Judge remarked that it wee evident that many of the entries had been made at one time. He would like to see the original etries very much indeed.

Witness said he had the scraps at home. He had not charged the defendant for the 5s advanced on the wheelbarrow to the son.

The Judge: Have you many customers like Capt. Adams at Paulton? — I am thankful to say we have not.

The Judge: Well, if you recover this amount you may be thankful that you had such a customer (Laughter.)

Mr Metcalfe: I see on the 22nd July eleven quarts of cider charged in addition to a quart of stout. Do you keep a man-of-war at Paulton and float it in liquor? (Laughter.)

Witness: I should like able to afford to. (Laughter.)

Well, did-they water the flowers with the liquor? - They may have, possibly.

Do you say Capt. Adams had 19 bottles of champagne? I have not counted them.

Well, I have. - Very likely he did then.

At this stage the case was adjourned until the 13th inst., his Honour remarking that it afforded an excellent text for a temperance sermon.

Mr Metcalfe: An awful example.

His Honour: it is really lamentable.