SLY GROG SELLING AT TOKOMAIRIRO.

Evening Star, Issue 3447, 10 March 1874, Page 2

SLY GROG SELLING AT TOKOMAIRIRO.

(Before J. P.Maitland, Esq., TS.M.) Charles Hilgendorf was'charged on the In. formation of George Lumb with knowingly per* nutting' one shilling’s worth of brandy to be sold within his store at Waihola, on the 6th mat, he not having a license to sell the same. Messrs Taylor and Reid appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. George Lumb said :—I am a revenue officer a r 1 Fr P nnce and a constable for the Colony After having racived various informations that* the defendant sold.drink in his store, I came up: country on the 6th inst., and called at h!6 houseI asked for dinner. I bad to wait till some Was prepared. I asked for a glass of beer, and Mrs H. said they did not .-e l any. I asked for a glass of something or other, and she gave me a nobbier of brandy. I then had dinner, and asked what I had to pay, and she said 2s altogether. I said “altogether’.’; that is Is 6d for the dinner and Gd for the brandy. She said yes. I then asked her for a shilling’s worth to rim °? the r ° ad - T She , Baid tbe y did not sell shiUlng.? w 9 rth I put down 2s 6d and asked for another nohblet. She brought a bottle out of a box at the end of -thg cqiirttefci a * d Bf°lu?, 8 f ° lu ?, to , p^ r out a whdte t asked her for the bottle so ..that I might help S elf - I drank another and as she fl fc - h ,“s aml T or tl,e bottle, I said “ I’ll retain this bottle, as I am a revenue officer, and my name is George Lumb.” I read my authonty to her and asked her to tell her husband what I bad done. I then went to the Lake where I waited for the evening coach *°r J-okomainro. About a mile on this side of defendant's store a passenger got in who I round out tQ b? the defendant. Ho sat opposite to me. I had the brandy in my carpet pag. I took the bottle in ray capacity us a- coKstqililSj I was prevented by the defendant from taking it to the nearest police station. When I .went into defendant’s store, I told 'Mrs Hilgendorf I was ill. I was suffering from diarrhoea. I did not tell her I was ill when I got the second nobbier. My reason for asking for a second one was that I might have stronger evidence, and in order to secure the bottle. I did hot Jthow defendant was from homo when' I went iq his store. There was no one in the house except his wife.—Mr Lumb then explained how ha had been prevented from taking the bottle to the police station. He said- When the coach came the length of Blues and Duthie’s, it-stopped and the defendant went out. I heard some parties laughing at the store, and having been previously made aware of tne character, I thought he was up to something and took precautions against his taking any advvntage of me. He again entered the coach, and threw a handful of pepper in my eves, I collared him, and a scuffle ensued. I called out to two men who were in the coach to assist me, but, although I wds an qld man'anil defendant a young man, they sat like stuck pigs, and rehdered no assistance although they, no'doubt, rail themselves English gentlenjoh. s Luring tb© scuffie defendant got a hold of uiy carped

bag, and leaj&dofitof the coach. He took the bottle and broke it, then returned the bag, saying he had got all he wanted. This was the case for the prosecution.—Mr Taylor said there was one objection fatal to the case. Two sales had been proved, and these being two offences, could not be conjoined in one information. His Worship took the same view of the mat* ter, and the information was dismissed. Mr Lumb explained that he would at once take out a fresh information, and it was arranged that the case would be heard on Wednesday. Tb o * Herald’ remarks that Mr Lumb, the revenue officer, appears to have caught a Tartar in his first attempt up-country at obtaining a conviction for sly grog selling. In Hilgendorf’s case, reported in another column, a very severe attack appears to Lave been made upon Lumb, Which it is reasonable to suppose would be the foundation for another charge. Rumor has it that “it has been squared,’’ whatever that may mean, and that the law will not be vindicated. If so, what will the Government say to it?