SLY GROG SELLING.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2506, 20 May 1909, Page 6

SLY GROG SELLING.

A CONVICTION OBTAINED.

HEAVY PENALTY INFLICTED

In tlie Magistrate’s Court, before Mr. W. A. Barton, S.M., yesterday, Dennis F. Bar 17 was charged that not being the holder of a publican’s license he did, on April 29th last, sell liquor at Gold Creek. .. The accused pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. Ivirk. Constable Henry Scott said that on the date in question he went to accusod'A tent and purchased a bottle or beer. The accused said he did not know if witness w r as a policeman because lie was a. stranger. Witness said a policeman would not come to such a place when h & was comfortable in town, in© accused'- go t the bottles of beer out ot a sack. Witness paid 2s for a bottle of beer and remarked that it was a high price. The accused retorted that there was always a risk of a heat 3 fine if he was caught selling it A few davs afterwards ho went with be geant Hutton and Constable Hoyle to Gold Greek and searched accused s tent and fpuncl three bottles of beer and a bottle of whisky. The defendant said-to Sergeant Hutton “i suppose he told voir I sold it to him. I never sold it to him, I’ll take my oath on that. 1 can prove -I never sold it to hmi. it was a bottle of hop beer that I sold. To Mr. Kirk: When he arrived at Gold Creek lie was not in uniform and was disguised as a navvy. He wore a tweed suit., an old <rtP, and a black handkercief around Ins neck. a thought the get up a. good disguise as a navvv. He had a pass from the Laboi Department to got work and went to the Engineer’s office where -he S a \ e his pirt. He was supplied with a shovel la tent with a fly. Ho went down near defendant’s tent, and as it was vacant occupied it lor the night. Ho had been a policeman between three or four vears. It was not Ins principle to tell the truth when it was necessary to tell a lie. He did very little drinking. After buying tlie beer from defendant lie went to tlie tent again to have « ISk Ho w* wt thirsty and had not been doing anv hard work. He did not ask to be supplied with liquor on the second visit. The defendant was alone on the first visit, but thcie wci t - others in the tent 011 the top Tim defendant did not say You could not get drink tins morning, and vo will get none now.” If witnesses, said thoseWordsi were used they perjuicd you . say that with vour high code of morals that allows you to tell a lie when you don t vv ant to tell the truth? His Worship: I cannot allow tnat, I want to show the constable is making a mistake. Ills Worship: It cannot be a take: if the evidence is false it js pci il To‘ Mr Kirk: He had taken part in oottiim evidence for sly grog cases in Christchurch. He had no recohcct o of seeing the defendant before. He did not remember prosecuting Barry K ulavin< T -Two up” at Springfield, neai Christchurch. As far as he knew defendant’s occupation was slj grog oci Jhm As a matter of fact defendant ■lent him a magazine winch witness did U °Mr Ct Kirk: Is that a high state of morals? Witness: 1 will pay for it. Al r Kirk: We don’t want yout

dressing taw no bittics of liop beer in tlie tent. He was not sup pli?d with liquor. He intended to go hack and get another bottle betoic > a vhm. He did not keep the bottle that he bought and did not, know wheic a man named Ryau, who helped him to drink the beer. was. the bottle w • is amt marked “Barry’s Hop Boer. Th« defendant did not tell witness that ne was: a policeman. tint Sergeant Hutton gave evidence that -with Constable Doyle and the last v i • ness be executed a search warrant at accused’s tent. He found a number o. bottles of Imp beer, 9 glasses, a. cork .screw, Hgtmfdes magazines, books newspapers and barber s tools, tluoc bottles of beer, and a bottle of whisky. From appearances the defendant seemed to be conducting a business as a ' hair-dresser and tobacconist and seller of drinks. He brought the beer and whiskv out of the tent, Y\ hen. defendant saw Scott be said “l suppose that nark told you I sold him some beer. J did sell him a bottle .of hop beer but mo other liquor. There were two or three men in the tent at the time who will swear to that, and by God I will fight :for it for all I am worth. To Mr. Kirk: The camp was about twelve miles from the nearest hotel. This closed the case for the prosecution. .. , , Mr. Kirk, in opening the defence, said that in any remarks be might make he wished his Worship to recognise that he fully appreciated the efforts ■that were being made to stamp out sly grog selling, but he might use words to reflect upon the means employed. Constable Scott was a young member of the force, and had been sent up ' alone to gather evidence to secure convictions. The method adopted by the Police Department was questionable, .and almost encouraged constables to commit norjurv. His Worship: Wo need not go into that question. Tlie question is did the ; man sell the beer? . Mr. Kirk: But your Worship will obI' ,s»rve the difference between the straight-forward evidence of Sergeant Hutton and the policeman. Tlie coni'- stable did not tell the Court of his own free will, about the second visit to the tent, and omitted to observe the important details in the fittings of the tent Evidence in direct contradiction to that of the constable would be given. The Police bad not called any evidence in corroboration, not even the man Ryan, who was said to have shared the ! beer with tlie constable. Hie constabip i drank a bottle and a half of beer and it was. quite, possible lie was the worse 101 1 the drink and did not know what was !' going on. The quantity of lmqor seized was not more than a reasonable amount for the use of one man. He would ask if there was any evidence for the defendant to answer. He hold that the Crown had not proved its case. . His Worship held these was suihcient evidence for the defendant to answer. The defendant, sworn, said he remembered the day Constable fecott came to his tent at Gold Creek. The constable said “do you sell beer? and witness answered no. Scott said , > mate lias just got a bottle oft you. 'f Witness said lie had got a bottle of hop and „ vou can have the same it SceM said he was bad «t£r ow and- wanted a recovery. He the bottle of hop beer, diank ;ss cf it. He tendered 2s in pay

ment and witness handed back Is Gd change. The'bottle was labelled “Barvys’ Hop Beer.” The constable came to the tent a, second time when there were other men present. He again asked for beer. Witness told him he could not get beer, but offered to soli him hop beer. Scott said that would be no good, and asked for a book. He had no liquor on the second occasion. He kept a barber’s establishment at the railway camp. ■ To Sergeant Hutton: Ho kept Ward g ale for himself. He was a boiler-maker bv trade. Malloy, referring to Scott, did not say “That’s the nark, that puts us up for 'two-up’ at Springfield.” He had followed the occupation of a bookmaker’s clerk, and had been previously before the Court in Gisborne. John Molloy, laborer, employed on the Railway works as Gold Creek, said he remembered Constaole Scott coining to defendant’s tent and asking for a drink. Barry said “No, you can’t get anything except hop beer. Scott then asked for a book and after getting one went away. He had never seen Scott before, and never remembered him at Springfield. He would swear ho did not say, referring to Scott,“That’s the nark that put us up at Springfield.” He was iri the tent when it was searched ami saw four bottles, uroduced, found under the bod. Ho had never seen intoxicating drink sold in the tent. Bernard Corbett, laborer, said that lie was in Barry’s tent when Scott came there. Scott asked for beer. Barry told him lie only had bop beer. Scott then asked for a book, and took one and went away. His Worship- said he believed tlie evidence for the defence to be a concocted story, whereas the evidence of Constable Scott was straight forward. The offence was difficult to prove and when a conviction was secured the penalty should be such as to act as a deterrent to others. The defendent would be convicted and fined £3O with costs 7s, and the liquor seized confiscated, in default one month’s imprisonment with lmfd labor.

Mr. Kirk applied for time to pay the fine.

His Worship: It would have been better had the man told the truth. I cannot allow any time.