SENTENCE REDUCED

Evening Post, Volume CXXXVIII, Issue 54, 1 September 1944, Page 6

SENTENCE REDUCED

ILLICIT STILL CASE

Ah appeal brought by Frederick Charles Danby, enpineer, against a sentence of one year's imprisonment with hard labour imposed by a Magistrate in June for being in possession of an illicit still resulted in the term being reduced to six months by Mr. Justice Smith in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. The grounds of the appeal were that the Magistrate's decision was contrary to the weight of evidence and natural justice, and that the sentence was, in all the circumstances, excessive. In giving his decision his Honour said that in the Magistrate's Court the appellant had pleaded guilty to a charge of keeping an illicit still. He did not then make allegations against the persons who had provided him with the still and who had supplied the materials for distillation and who had for, the most part received the profits. The Magistrate must therefore have thought that the appellant was the proprietor of the still. "The facts now before the Court show that the appellant was largely the tool of pther people," said his Honour. "They also show that when allowance is made for the sugar bags which were used for the orchard, the operations of distillation were not as extensive as the Magistrate was entitled to assume they.were. In view of these matters, I think there must be some adjustment of the sentence, although, if the facts had been as they appeared to the Magistrate, I would not have altered the sentence. "ELEMENT OF MORAL GUILT." "The detailed circumstances of the case referred to by Mr. Mazengarb when the offender was fined £100 are not before me. An instance of that kind may or may not show the difficulty of imposing comparable sentences. I can only deal with this case as I think it should be dealt with upon the facts before me. The whisky which the appellant was making was being made not only in fraud of the revenue but was being sold to members of the Armed Forces. Conduct of that kind must tend to interfere with the efficiency of the troops and shows that the offence comprises a serious element of moral guilt. Taking into account these facts on the one hand, and on the other, that the man was not so much a principal as the tool of other people, that he has had a good record for many years past and«has heavy family responsibilities, the sentence will be reduced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour." Mr. A. J. Mazengarb appeared for the appellant, and Mr. W. H. Cunningham for the Crown.