SMUGGLING TOBACCO.

Globe, Volume XXI, Issue 1784, 8 November 1879, Page 3

SMUGGLING TOBACCO.

Edward Williams was charged at the Lyttelton Resident Magistrate’s Court yesterday, on remand, with unshipping, harboring, or having in his possession, about 401 b. of un-Customed tobacco. Mr Joyce appeared for the accused. Mr A. Rose, Collector of Customs, said he had no further evidence to offer. Mr Joyce said he should like to examine Constable Neil. Robert Neil deposed—l am a constable stationed at Lyttelton ; am not a revenue officer. Witness then repeated his evidence given at the former hearing as to arresting the accused, and the conversation that took place between himself and the prisoner. Counsel cross-examined the witness very closely ns to whether he or the accused spoke first when the arrest took place. Mr Joyce then asked whether on the d-y the arrest took place a man named Smith had been arrested. The Collector of Customs objected to the question. Counsel said as a matter of fact a man of the name of Smith had been put in the cell with the prisoner by the police for the purpose of pumping him, and ho considered such conduct most scandalous. In reply to a question, witness said a man named Smith was locked up the same night with the accused. The line of evidence was again objected to’.by Mr Rose, the objections being sustained by the Bench. The evidence as to the man Smith was then dropped, the only further question being as to whether Smith was brought up before the Court next day. The witness replied that he was not. Counsel said that was quite sufficient. Mr Rose, on behalf of the Crown, was about to address the Bench, when counsel for the defendant said he had no objection to his doing so, as a favor, but that he could not do it by right. Mr Rose thought he had a perfect right as prosecutor. The Bench, however, pointed out that section 20 of the Justices of the Peace Act prohibited him. Subsequently the Collector of Customs submitted to the ruling, and Mr Joyce withdrew his objection. Mr Rose then addressed the Court, and asked that the full penalty of £IOO be inflicted. Mr Joyce, for defendant, contended that nothing had been shown that the goods were smuggled. He also objected to the information, two offences being, as he contended, in it. The objection was overruled, The accused was then called, the Collector objecting that a person liable to imprisonment should not be examined in his own defence. The objection was not sustained, and the accused was put in the box. Edward Williams, sworn, said —I was taking a stroll around the wharves on Tuesday night. I have been in Lyttelton six or seven years, and am a laborer. I saw the bag as I was coming up from Peacock’s Wharf to Norwich Quay. It was lying on the breastwork, just where the vessels discharge firewood. It was dark at the time, and I picked it up and put it on my shoulder. I was coming up Dublin street and I met the constable. I could have gone back had I wanted to evade him. I had not opened the bag when I met the constable. The exact spot where I passed Mr Neil was between Mr Wood’s coal yard and Mr Green’s boarding-house. I would have stopped him and told him that I had picked the bag up only he had a lady with him. I bade him “Good evening.” Afterwards he called me and asked what y had in the bag, to which I replied that I thought it was two pieces of wood. I should have taken it to the police station just as I found it had he not stopped me. I afterwards wont with him to the station, I carrying the tobacco. The constable said to me if I didn’t tell him where I got it from he would make it as hot as he could for me in Court. He afterwards visited me in the cell. I asked him then what Smith was put in the cell for with me, and he said he didn’t know, but thought it was for stealing a watch from a woman. Smith said he had been put in for larking with a young woman on the Sumner road. He said the Serjeant-Major had seen him, and said he would have to put him in the lock-up. Smith was afterwards set at liberty. The witness was examined by the Collector of Customs as to how he concluded that the contents of the bag wore wood, and if wood, why ho wanted to take it to the police station. To Mr Joyce—lt was not more than two or three minutes’ walk from the place I picked up the bag when I was arrested, and I had only to go a short distance further (to Colo’s corner), where I should have had light enough to have examined its contents. The witness, in answer to a question put by the Collector of Customs by permission of the Court, said that when the constable arrested him he was close to Cole’s corner. Constable Neil was called by the Bench to give evidence as to the statement made by the counsel for the accused that a man named Smith had been placed in the cell with the accused for the purpose of eliciting a confession from him. The constable said ho had acted entirely under instructions from the Sergeant-Major. He believed that Smith was put in the cell for the purpose stated. He was not arrested on any charge. Sergeant-Major O’Grady, called, said—Smith had been used by him to assist in obtaining evidence. The course pursued bv the police was perfectly in accordance with custom. He had done the same thing before in cases, and would again. Mr Joyce, counsel for the accused, wished to examine the Sergeant in reference to the information obtained from the accused by Smith, but the latter not having been used as a witness in the Court, the Bench ruled that no questions should be asked. The Bench said this evidence had been called by him in reference to Smith with a view of his (the Court) ascertaining whether the police had done anything irregular. The Bench would report the matter to the Inspector. The Magistrate, in giving judgment, said ho was satisfied the offence had been proved, irrespective of the points of law raised. , The defendant would be fined £IOO, and bo I detained until the amount was paid. Mr Joyce, counsel for defendant, applied for a remission of three-fourths of the penalty under section 202 of the Customs Act, providing or first offenders. The Bench thought a formal application should be made,through the Hon, the Commissioner of Customs. He didn’t think he would entertain the application of counsel at present. Counsel remarked that the Court must do it then or not at all. Mr Rose opposed a reduction of the fine. It was not an instance of a poor man having committed himself. There were others shielded in the ease ho felt sure, and he could not 1 recommend any reduction at present. The . Bench said the decision would not bo disi turbed.