SHEETED RIGHT HOME.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1019, 7 January 1911, Page 6

SHEETED RIGHT HOME.

CITY CROC CASE, RECENT RAID. IN MARTIN STREET. As a result of a police raid on a sly grog-shop in Martin. Street on Sunday night, December 25, ten men appeared in tho Magistrate's Court yesterday before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M., charged with breaches of the Licensing Act. Alfred Britis, a coloured man, and tho occupier of a liouso in Martin Street, was charged with selling liquor without a license, and,.as tho occupier of' the house, with being privy to the 'sale of liquor. Edward - Henry Power was charged with'selling liquor, without a license, to Arthur James Reid Palmer. Eight men, who had -been found on the premises, were charged with having been tliero for tho purpose of dealing in liquor. Their names were: William Solway, Eugene Mahoney, Joseph Broome; Henry Lucas,.. Alexander' M'Crae, Thomas' Reynolds, Patrick Cahill, and Joseph ' Flanagan. Neither M'Crae, Reynolds, nor Flanagan" appeared! Each of the other, de-i tendants pleaded not/'guilty. Mr. J. J. M'Grath appeared for Britis, Power, Solway, Broome, Lucas, Cahill, but Mahoney was not represented by' counsel. Sub-Inspector Norp wood conducted the prosecution. Thero was an additional ' charge against Solway of giving a false name and address when questioned by Sergeant Rutlcdgo. To this charge accused pleaded guilty, and, when the other cases had been dealt with, he was ordered to pay costs of the prosecution, amounting to 7s. •' ,

Police Evidenca In Chief, Constablo Palmer, of the Mount Cook Police Station, stated that, acting under instructions from '• Sergeant Rutledge, ho had gone to 28a Martin Street at about 9. p.m. on December 25. Ho and another man were admitted by Britis, and he noticed that some 15 men were in the house, some being under the influence of liquor. Britis brought a bottle of beer into the room, ono of tho men paid for it, and it was consumed on the premises.' Then Power brought in a bottle, and another man paid for it. Witness then asked for two bottles, which-Power supplied, and witness paid Power for them at Is. 6d. a bottle. When these were consumed, witness purchased another two bottles, and these were also consumed. Power'was engaged in bringing in liquor part of tho. time, and Britis also, for part of the time. All tho liquor 'was brought from one room as far as witness could sec.

After purchasing another.bottle of. beer, lib (witness) left the premises/ and met Sergeant llutledgo . and ■ Constablo M'Kelvio by appointment. Sergeant Rutledge tlien instructed witness to return to the house, and,' after making a second visit, he again met Sergeant Rutledge and Constable M'Kelvie. Tho three then wept to tho house, and, when . they, were admitted,. Sergeant Rutledge locked tlio door, tho premises were searched, and a quantity of liquor seized. ' ' , , 327 Full Bottles Found.

Sergeant Rutledge, in tho course of evidence, stated that 327 full bottles of beer were found under the stairs, 4S empty beer bottles, and threb squareface bottles in tho scullery, while, in tho yard, tli'ero wero 12 dozen "empties."

Constables M'Kelvie and Doyle also gave ovidbne'e. 1 ' » • '' j

Mr. M'Grath stated that ho proposed to show that Britis had arranged with Lucas, M'Crae, Broome, and Power to purchase the liquor so that they might bo able to entertain their friends over the holidays. Lucas, M'Crae, and Broome wero seafaring men, and it .was not always convenient for them to purchase liquor when they had arrivcil in Wellington, so each . had subscribed £2 10s. to effect a purchase for tho holidays. Cahill had entered the premises by accident.

Evidence was then given by Alexander Power, boilermaker's labourer, and Alfred Britis.

In cross-examination by Sub-Inspector Norwood, the story of the latter witness broke down. The' sub-inspector produced a book and' read therefrom several entries of purchases and returns of ."empties.' f Witness admitted that five entries corresponded With purchases which lie had matlo in December. The total amounted to sixty-eight-dozen. Mr. M'Grath asked witness if. ho thoroughly; understood what the sub-inspec-tor was saying, and witness admitted that ho did.

Patrick Cahill, a Government servant in the New Zealand Railways, stated that ho went to tho house with Mahoney and Duggan, not knowing that it was a sly grog-shop. Henry Lucas, Joseph Broome, William Solway also gave evidence in defence. ' - " Perjury Throughout."

In giving judgment, the magistrate stated that it was impossible to conceive a clearer caso of. sly grog-selling. Ono had only to go back to December 1 to see. the amount of .liquor • taken to tlio house, and it was palpable that Britis and Power wero; carrying on' tlio business for some months. What the exact relationship was.lie.could not say, but Power had 'been taking an active part in tho soiling. His Worship added that ho absolutely believed all that the young constablo had said, but, for the others, -it had been perjury, throughout. Palmer had denied everything but tlio one purchase, and Britis would probably liavo done so "but for beiiig confronted with the book. Mahoney might have boon a pilot to tho house, but his Worship " did not believo his evidence or that of Cahill or any of tlio others. It was no use talking about first offenders in theso cases. If sly grog-selling- was to be put down, it must bo severely pun- 1 ished. The police had groat difficulty in coping with tho offence, and here was an example of tho perjury' committed in these cases.

Power and Britis wore each fined £50 and costs lis., and, as they stated they had neither goods nor chattels on which distress could be levied, the default was fixed at one month's imprisonment. Each of tho other defendants was fined .£2 and. costs 7s. Tho liquor was confiscated by law, and later in tho day tho corks were drawn and the contents of tho bottles emptied into tho police station drains.'

Mr. Jl'Grath said ho hoped that, tho magistrate's-strictures' did not reflect on counsel or 011 the conduct of tho case. '

His Worship .indicated that his comments applied only to the defendants Thero was no reflection on counsel.