MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2408, 13 March 1915, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

SUNDAY CUSTOMERS' BEER

RAID ON ALLEGED SLY-GRGG SHOPS I'hero was quite a festive appearanco about tile Magistrate's Court .yesterday morning. Dozens and dozens of bottles of beer were lined up in rows of four at 0110 side of the court, a small table groaned under somo more dozen bottles of the same amber-hued liquid, while several "long" glasses, a competentlooking corkscrew, and a few partially tilled bottles mounted 011 the witnessbox gave quite a publichouse appearance to the place. The display was the result of last Sunday's raid by tie police on alleged sly grog shops in Holland street, i'lio persons alleged to Lave been in possession of tho bottles and the charges they bad to answer were as follow Jack Ernest Kidner was charged with (1) selling liquor without a license to Constable Thorn; (2) selling liquor to Constable Petty; (3) selling on unlicensed premises at 1-1 Holland Street. John Williamson, chargm.i (1) selling liquor to Constable ihom; (2) selling liquor to Constable lotty. Hose Lee, charged with—(l) selling liquor to Constable Petty; (2) selling liquor to the same; (3) selling liquor to Constable Thorn; (4) selling liquor on unlicensed premises, at 14 Holland Street. Archibald West, charged with—(l) selling liquor to Constable Ihom; (2) to Constable Petty; (3) the same.

Mr. E. G. Jellicoe appeared for Kidner and Williamson, and Inspector Heuor police. The charge against Williamson was taken first. Constable Petty was tile first witness. He said he had been detailed for special duty on March 7, in company with Constable Thorn, and turning into College Street they saw accused and some other men. Witness and Constable Thorn sat . there at tho corner until about. TO p.m., and then Williamson came along and, said, "Do you want another bottle of beer?" Witness replied. "How much ?" Williamson said, "l'aghteenpence." Constable Thom said, 'I will have one too." Witness gave Williamson Is:, end Constable Thom gave him 2s. Williamson, remarked, "You owe your mate 6d.," and then went for the beer. He returned shortly with two bottles of beer, and told them to "cover it up." Witness and Constable Thom went back to Manners Street station.and gave-the bottles to Sergeant Kelly. Witness and Constable Ihom returned to the same locality about 11 o'clock, and they again saw Williamson, and witness said. . "How about getting me some whiskeyWilliamson replied, "I can get you a couple of 'bobs'' worth." Witness handed one shilling to him. Williamson and the man West went to a certain house and there Williamson took a bottle from \Y est and . went to another house. Ho never camo back, as the police entered the house about this time. Witness was subjected to a 6ever© cross-examination by Mr. Jellicoe on his evidonce.

lou appear to be rather hazy about oid take place," remarked Mr. Jellicoe at the oonclusion of the examination. ...

The Magistrate: I don't think he is. Constable- Thom, who was with tlio previous witness, gave similar evidence. ■ Sergeant Kelly stated that he sampled the contents of the two bottles wbicli had been handed 'him by the two previous 'witnesses, and was satisfied they contained beer.

"You are not satisfied that it is beer now?".remarked Mr. Jellicoe.

Yes, I am," replied tho witness. Continuing his evidence, witness said he had had accused under observation, and on the day in question tiad seen bun going to No. 14 Holland Street, and came out with something under his coat.

This concluded the evidence, and Mr. Jellicoe Hibmitted "with the utmost confidence"' that the case must be dismissed. The charge mentioned "did sell liquor ; the evidence showed that defendant went to 14 Holland Street, where he himself procured the.beer. He might be aiding and abetting, this person at No. 14 Holland .Street, but he did not "sell" the liquor. The prosecution was on the horns of a dilemma, said counsel, as the person from whom Williamson got tho liquor was ako before the Court on a like charge. They both could not be charged with selling the same liquor. The Magistrate repUed that in his opinion there was sufficient evidence of a direct salo. Defendant would be convicted. Leave to appeal was granted 1 he nest case called was that of Kidner's. \

Constable Phillips was the first witf* 53 , 3 - He said thai on February 28 he had had defendant's premises under observation. Witness saw men "running" liquor from the house, No. 14 Holland street, for customers they had' secured.

Sergeant Kelly said he had bad Kidner. s house under observation for the two previous Sundays. On Sunday, February 28, he had seen men securing customers who went down to Kidner's house On the following Sunday March 1, witness saw Kidner taking two men into the house. On the same day witness saw Williamson go to Kidner's house on two occasions, and coming out with something under his coat, handing the ,samo to people down the street. About 11.45 a.m. on the same day witness entered the house with a search warrant.' Kidner, his wife, and Williamson were in, the kitchen. Witness asked him where the plant was, and Kidner 'took him to a cupboard, where there were 78 bottles of draught beer. He said he had purchaswl it from McCarthy's Brewery for his own consumption. Kidneir said that was all he had in the house. On searching the house witness discovered .10 bottles under a sofa, and in .other parts of the house a small bottle of methylated spirits, two other larger and full bottles, a corkscrew, * three glasses, and l about a dozen empty beer bottles.

Mr. Jellicoe submitted that, there was not a tittle of evidence that any sale took place on defendant's premises. As to tho charge of selling to the constables, counsel submitted that the Magistrate had already stultified himself in' this respect by convicting Williamson, who went to defendant's house to get the. liquor

Inspector Hendrey contended that defendant being a partv to the sale by Williamson,• he must be convicted.

The Magistrate agreed with the Inspector, and said he must convict in respect of his being a party to the sale, but in regard to the sale .to the two constables he could not convict. Leave to appeal was also granted, The Magistrate intimated that _ he would impose tlio penalties on Williamson and Kidner before proceeding with the other cases. The latter was fined £25 with court costs 75., and the former fined £5 Is. on each charge of selling liquor to the two constables, in default 14 days' gaol; The security for the appeal was fixed at £10 10s. in each case. INFORMATIONS DISMISSED. Tlio cases against Boso Lee and Archibald West were taken next, and Mr. E. J. Fitzgibbon appeared for the former. The evidence fcr the prosecution was similar to that given in the preceding cases. Archibald West gave evidence in defence. He said that all the bottles of beer found on Mrs. Leo's premises had' been purchased by him, Mrs, Lep, ho said, kaaw nothing About tho matter,

nor did she know anything about the beer going out of tlic' house.

Mr. ITitsigibbon said the information should bo dismissed, as there was absolutely no real ovidenco against Mrs. Lee regarding the sale of liquor, or that she had been privy to the sale. Tho Magistrate said tho evidence against Mrs. Lee was not so strong as would givo her the benefit of the doubt and dismiiised tho information.

• West pleaded guilty to tho charges, and was fined £2 10s., with costs 75., in default seven days' gaol, on each of the first two charges, and £5, or fomteen daj's' gaol, t. L the third charge. AWABD BREACHES. The Inspector of Awards (Mr. slaughter) proceeded against Henry Brown, restaurantour, for failing to keep a holiday book, and failing to keep a time and wages book.' Defendant was fined as., with costs 76., on each charge. Arthur Dodd, charged with failing to keep a holiday book, and witli employing an assistant extended hours, without giving notice t) th„ Inspector, was defended by Mr. Dale. After bearing the facts of the case, the Magistrate inflicted a nominal pwislty of Is., with court costs 75., ii' each case. ' THE ADELAIDE ROAD MURDER. A further remand to Thursday next was granted in the case of Charles Harvey, charged with the murder of 'Wong Way Cliing, oil September 12. Inspector Hendrey. said tho Crown would endeavour to go on with the case then, but it was possible another remand would be asked for. OTHER CASES. Joseph John Johnston was remanded to appear at Hamilton on Monday on a charge of altering a cheque drawn in his favour from £5 ss. to £5 15s. Patrick Brady was sent to gaol for two months for drunkenness, and fined £3, or one month's gaol, for using obscene ' language. A prohibition order was also taken out against him. For drunkenness, John Alfred Pryor was fined 10s., in default 48 hours' gaol, and on another charge of breaking his prohibition order at Maugaw.eka fined £1, or three days' gaol. The following were penalised as mentioned for committing by-law-breaches:—George Howard, fined 10s., with costs 7srf Hugh Doherty, fined 55., with costs 75.; and Fred. Yanlco, fined 55., with costs 7s.