From the Deal, Walmer, and Sandwich Mercury, 14 September, 1872. 1d.

DRUNK AND RIOTOUS

Read start of summons.

Jordan was then charged by Supt. Brothers with being drunk in the "Three Colts," public-house, on the night of the 1st of September, and of riotous and disorderly behaviour.

Defendant admitted that he was drunk, but not that he was riotous.

E. H. Cork, landlord of the above house, was likewise summoned for unlawfully permitting drunkenness in his house, but the offence was by mistake alleged in the summons to have been committed on the 31st of August instead of on the 1st of September, and Mr. Walter Farley, who appeared for Cork, was at first inclined to make an objection on that ground, but the Magistrates' Clerk (Mr. J. C. Martin) remarked that any objection to the summons would fail by the appearance of defendant. Consequently, Mr. Farley, (after a private interview with the client) withdrew his objection.

Supt. Brothers said: On the 1st of September I saw the defendant Jordan standing and the bar of the "Three Colts" with a glass of beer in his hand, and he was calling out to someone in the room to drink with him. This was between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening. I had seen him at the same place previously, and then he came out to me in a very excited state and wanted to know what I had been saying to the landlord (Mr. Clark) about his drawing them beer on the previous night. He also said I must not think I had a _____ fool to deal with. He was very excited, and I told him if he were not quiet I should have to lock him up.

Cross-examined by Mr. Furley: The exact words Jordon used when he came up to me were, "I say, sir, what made you go into the "Three Colts" and ask the landlord about drawing beer last night." He made use of very bad language. He staggered out of the house, and my idea of his being drunk was not from his language. I saw beer in the glass he had in his hand. I have only known the landlord since he has kept the "Three Colts." The house has been conducted very badly indeed. I have not brought any charge against the landlord, because I am not harsh against anyone - the first night the house was opened the landlady drew beer after hours. The real reason that I have nor brought any charge against the landlord is because I have not been actually able to prove one. I have seen him order people out of his house at the closing hour. I believe the house has been closed at proper hours since the new Act has been in force. Jordan was drunk, and I saw him with the glass.

Mr. Furley having addressed the Bench, called the following witnesses.

E. H. Cork, who said I was on my premises the whole of Sunday, September 1st. Two persons came in drunk in the evening, but I would not serve them, and I told them to go home, as I thought they had had enough. A man named Bragg put them out. I saw Jordan in the house in the evening between 7 and 8. He had had quite enough and I would not serve him with anything. He kept coming in and out, and I told him several times that he had better go home.

William Rose, hostler at the "Three Colts," corroborated the evidence of the last witness and swore that Jordan was not served with anything.

The Magistrates then deliberated, and in announcing their decision, the Mayor commented upon the very reprehensible conduct of the defendants. Such behaviour could not be allowed, but the Magistrates were disposed on this occasion to deal leniently with the defendants. Jordon, although the worst, had one redeeming feature  for he had expressed contrition for what had happened and a wish that it would not occur again, and that alone had prevented the Magistrates from punishing him with the full severity of the law. He would be fined 5s., and the costs 11s. and Durban the same. Hoile, whom they had always regarded as a respectable young man, would be fined 1s., and 11s. costs. In default of payment, Jordan and Durban would have to go to prison for seven days and Hoile for five days. With respect to the second offence, Jordan would be fined another 5s. and costs, 12s. or in default be imprisoned for seven days. The summons against Mr. Cork would be dismissed, but at the same time the Magistrates would warn him as to the manner in which he conducted his house.

Jordan paid the money in the first instance, but went to gaol for the second offence, and each of the other defendants also paid the money.