Coulter v Martin

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 10 November 1877
• Date: 10 November 1877
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Q. Bench.

Before MAY, C. J., O'BRIEN and FITZGERALD, JJ.

COULTER,

COMPLAINANT,

MARTIN,

DEFENDANT.

Lutton v. ThompsonUNK Ir. R. 10 c. L. 10.

Stevenson v. O'NeillUNK Ir. R. 11 C. L. 134.

Cassidy v. MooreUNK Ir. R. 10 C. L. 216.

Vaughan v. WeldonELR L. R. 10 C. P. 48.

— Drunkenness in public place — Prosecution by the Royal Irish Constabulary —— Application of penalties.

VoL. XI.) COMMON LAW SERIES. 477 COULTER, COMPLAINANT, v. MARTIN, DEFENDANT (1). Towns Improvement (Ireland) Act, 1854 (17 (5. 18 Vict. c. 103, ss. 72 4. 92)-Drunkenness in public place-Prosecution by the Royal Irish Constabulary-Licensing Acts 1872 and 1874-Application of penalties. The town of Strabane being under the Towns' Improvement (Ireland) Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 103), a summons was issued by and in the name of an acting constable of the Royal Irish Constabulary against a person for being drunk within the municipal boundary :-Held, that the proceeding was rightly brought by and in the name of the Complainant, though he had not the express assent of the Attorney-General ; and that, upon conviction, one half of the penalty should go to the Town Commissioners and the other half to the conÂstable. Lutton v. Thompson, Q. B. (Ir. R. 10 C. L. 10), overruled. Cassidy v. Moore, C. P. (Ir. R. 10 C. L. 216), and Stevenson v. O'Neill, Ex. (Ir. R. 11 C. L. 134), followed. CASE STATED for the opinion of the Queen's Bench, under the 20 & 21 Vict. c. 43, by the magistrates for the Strabane Petty Sessions district. The town of Strabane is subject to all the provisions of the Towns' Improvement Act, 1854. At the hearing of a complaint brought on summons by the Complainant J. Coulter, Head-constable of Strabane, it was proved that the Defendant had been found drunk on the public street within the municipal boundary. The Defendant contended that no proceedings could be taken for the recovery of the penalty for the offence, other than by the Town Commissioners as Complainants, unless Complainant first obtained the consent of Her Majesty's Attorney-General. In consequence of doubts existing as to this point, the magistrates submitted the following questions to the Court : (1) Whether a proceeding for the recovery of a penalty for the offence in the summons in this case stated can be taken by or in the name of any person other than the Town Commissioners as Complainants, unless such person was a party grieved, or a person who had first obtained the consent in writing of the...