COLOUR OF GIN.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 224, 21 September 1928, Page 8

COLOUR OF GIN.

CONUNDRUM IN COURT. *

SAMPLE FROM A HOTEL.

MAGISTRATE DISMISSES CASE

Three samples of gin, one as clear as the contents of the Nihotupu Stream, and the other two lightly tinted, sorely perplexed the presiding magistrate, and also counsej for the rival parties and an inspector, at the Police Court this morning. A prosecution was brought by Mr. V. N. Hubble, on behalf of the Health Department, against J. Reilly, licensee of a hotel in the city, that a bottle of gin stocked by the defendant was not up to standard. Mr. McVeagh appeared on behalf of the licensee. In the course of the hearing a small sample bottle sealed by the inspector who had laid the information was produced by Mr. McVeagh, and this failed to show the clear colour of the contents in the original bottle from which the inspector had taken it. The seal was broken in Court, and a bottle of an identical type was produced in the effort to discover whether the discolouration was due to the nature of the glass, but as the difference in tinting was still quite distinct it was decided to send for a third bottle, which had been kept by the inspector as a check, and had also been under seal. The two samples upon being compared agreed completely in appearance, but both differed from the labelled bottle. _ "I don't think any barman would have gin of that colour on the shelf," said Mr. Hunt, S.M., "Something must have gone wrong wtih the samples." In opposition to the magistrate's view of the position the inspector suggested that atmospheric conditions and sunlight may have affected the appearance of the gin. The bottles used in taking samples were all sterilised and new corks were supplied by the analyst. The analyst's statement showed a deficiency of proof spirit and an excess of extract in the gin. Mr. Hunt said he had always understood that gin could not be adulterated, as there would immediately be a change in colour. Mr. Hubble: That is so. Mr. McVeagh remarked that the case was in some respects an extraordinary one. The colour of the gin Was of much importance, and it was apparently impossible to explain why the sealed samples were tinted in the unusual manner. John Reilly, son of the licensee, and Ernest Hayward, a barman at the hotel, were both called as witnesses, but neither could explain the amber appearance nor the failure of the gin to give a correct analysis. They said no one in the "house" had interfered with it, and the only possibility was that a customer had poured some of the contents into a glass and then discovered, after adding ginger ale or other beverage, that it was not°of the desired taste, upon which he had poured it back without being observed by the barman. The inspector admitted that he had obtained a bottle of the same gin from the hotel two days later and found it correct on analysis. The bottle which had been found deficient in proof spirit was half-full When the samples were taken. "I wouldn't drink gin that colour," remarked Mr. Hunt, in dismissing the case.