The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-26 00:00:00

LAMBETH-STREET

On Saturday Mr.Parlour, the landlord of the Alfred's
11ead, public-house, in Alfred-street, Stepney, appeared
before the Hon. G. C. Norton, to answer to an in-
formation laid against him by the police, for the alleged
offence of having his house open after the hour of
twelve o'clock on the night of Saturday, the 10th inst.,
and also with having drunkenly and disorderly persons
in his house.

Mr. Duncombe appeared as solicitor for the de-
fendant.

Police-constable Thomas Watkins, K 310, on being
sworn, stated that about half-past twelve o clock on the
night mentioned in the information, he was on duty near
the house of the defendant, and saw seven men, all of
whom were drunk, come out of it, and almost immedi-
ately commenced to quarrel in the street. He (wit-
ness) went up to them, and requested them to disperse,
but they refused, and two of thorn, who were ovzch
more intoxicated than the rest, and whom he recog-
nised to be most dangerous characters, made use of
iolent threats towards him, and he was actually
afraid to meddle with them until his brother con-
stable came up, and with his assistance, he suc-
ceeded in dispersing them, The defendant stood at
his door, from the time the men came out until
they were dispersed, which occupied at least
a quarter of an hour, and af.er that time
he (witness) distinctly saw him serve two persons, one
a female, with a pint of beer, at a quarter of an hour,
or twenty minutes, to one o'clock.
The witness was cross-examined at some length by
Duncombe. He said he judged of the time by
seeing the clock of the defendant, and would swear that
t was twenty minutes past twelve when the parties
came out of the house. He denied that the quarrel, of
which he spoke, took place on account of he himself
snatching a pipe from the mouth of one of the violent
characters he had represented, and smoking it himself.
He swore that, at the time his brother officer come up,
the defendant's door was open, and the defendant him-
self standing at it, and his brother offie-zr must have seen
him.

.....
Police-constable Thomas Burns, K 255, was next
called, and said that, on the night in question, about
half-past twelve, or a little after, he was attracted to
Alfred-street, by hearing a quarrelling on the beat of
the last witness, and on going there he saw about twelve
men, one of whom was drunk, and the others appeared
to have been drinking. The officer Watkins was
endeavouring to get them away, and with his assistance
succeeded in doing so.
In his cross•examination this witness swore positively
that the defendant's door was closed when he first came
up, that he did not see the defendant at all, and he did
not see him serve any one.
Mr. Duncombe contended at some length that publi-
cans were not bound to close their houses at twelve
o'clock—that there was nothing in the Police Act to
compel them, the words ,in the clause being, that they
were not to open their houses before one o'clock in the
afternoon of Sunday.
Mr. NORTON read the opiaion of the Law Officers of
the Crown to the contrary, and which stated that publi-
cans were liable to penalties for keeping their houses
open after twelve on Saturday night, an.l said that this
was also his (Mr. Norton's) interpretation of the Act.
Mr. Duncombe replied that he had obtained the opi-
nion of Counsel on the point, which was diametrically
opposite to that of the Law Officers of the Crown, and
it was the intention of the Licensed Victuallers' Protec-
tion Society, of which he was the solicitor, to try the
question.
Mr. NORTON observed this point was one of consider-
able importance to publicans, and one on which they
should obtain the best opinion.
Five respectable witnesses were called for the de-
fence, who completely negatived the statement of the
police. They stated that the defendant's house was
completely clear of customers at five minutes past 12
o'clock on the night in question, and that after that time
not a single drop of spirits or beer was served to any

person.
Mr. NORTON thought that the officer Watkins made
a great mistake as to the time, and some of the circum-
stances described by him, and dismissed the complaint.