WHAT PROFIT?

NZ Truth, Issue 1193, 11 October 1928, Page 7

WHAT PROFIT?

When Whisky Is Not Whisky

(From "N.Z. Truth's" Thames Rep.) - Portly. John Kelly, mine host of the Junction Hotel, Thames, is a spiritualist.. In working the mystic spell, John adopts not the oonventional method of producing spirits from the ether, for the entertainment of those whose money he takes. v JOHN has different ideas on the matJ ter of spirits. He causes them to vanish. -Not quite so entertaining to his clientele, certainly, but he probably finds it even more profitable to himself than\ the orthodox medium does. When regular frequenters of John Kelly's Junction Hotel began to not tlce a strong resemblance between. the whisky which they got there to the liquid they drew from the. Thames ." reservoir through their household taps, they not unnaturally began to talk Uiings over amongst themselves. Heads wagged, wry faces were made, glasses were held sarcastically to. the light,, but the dissatisfaction passed apparently unobserved by the proprie-

lUfiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiuiiiiminiimiiiiimiiiiiiniiii Lucky Punter COUNSEL: "Did you have much ** luck at the races that day?" Witness: "Sure, I oame baok square." wiii|iiimiimimiiiiiiiiiiiiii«iiiiimmimtiKwniiiimiiiimiiiiiiiiHniiiHiiimmiii tor and the barman, and the whisky rot no better. 80 the tip was gently passed en to Government offloials and one day two Inapeotorc of the Health Department onlled at the Junotlo'n and paid far and. took away several samples of the. liquid whloh John Kelly had been selling as whisky, brandy and sohnapps. . Was .John Kelly, who has run pubs tn different' parts of the country for the past forty years, too blinded by , greed to see the ominous signs of dissatisfaction on the faces of his ous? ! tomers? Was It portly John's object to make a welter of things while the going was good? Or waß it John's philanthropic intention to save the poor devils ' who Bpent their money at his bar, from the terrible things preaohe'd by the prohibitionists,' by cutting 1 down.thelr. liquor. to the minimum? ; ' The analyst's .report showed that the: percentage of added water m each case, when . pom pared ..with liquor of, ordinary : strength was: Brandy, 40.1 per cent.; Duff's whisky, 36.6 per cent.; Black ftndr tfshlt£» ■. 34 .per cent, and schnapps,' 26.6- per ; cent . . • In the, -case of the whisky,' neither sample bore any. resemblance to the brands Indicated on the labels. They appeared to have been drawn from the one bulk. Lawyer Clendon. tried to bluff Magistrate Platts into believing' that the sales had been forced on John Kelly; % that John was oompelled to Bell this liquor to. the officers against his will. An inspector would, he said, enter an hotel and demand this or that bottle and if the publican or his assistant said • "that ' is ' not for sale, it is adulterated^ and is for the publican's own use," the inspector would still' insist on taking it away. The health department, he held, was the most autocratic and domineering m the Dominion. Lawyer Clendon pointed out that Kelly had been running hotels for 40 yeai's and that this was the first , case of this nature against him. Inspector said Kelly was liable to have his hotel placarded to the effect that adulterated liquor had been sold there. ' The house also could be disqualified for a/^couple of years. The case was the worfet he had^ever come 1 across. " : . . ■. The magistrate agreed that the offence was a very serious one. It was, m fact, the most; serious class of offence a publican qould commit. Defendant would be convicted and fined £20 on each of the two whisky charges and £5 and costs for two breaches of the Food and Drugs Act. The costs amounted to £14/13/ -, so that John had to pay m all £64/13/-. Another local publican named Walter Bell, whose oase was described as not •o bad, w&a fined a total of £45/18/ - - lnoluding cobUs for similar breaches. The percentage of dilution m this oase was 27.8 m one instance and 12.8 In another.