THE LIQUOR LAW.

Otago Witness, Issue 2896, 15 September 1909, Page 4

THE LI QUOR LAW.

BREACHES AT WELLINGTON. WELLINGTON, September 10. Two men named Alexander M'Leod and Robert Wilson, unlicensed persons, were charged in the Magistrate's Court to-day before Mr W: G. Riddell, S.M., with having sold beer on Sunday, sth inst. Two allegations were brought against M'Leod, who pleaded " Guilty."' Sub-inspector Norwood, who prosecuted, stated that the illicit traffic in liquor on Sunday had been going on in the neighbourhood of Taranaki and Tory streets for some time past. On the Sunday in question two constables had ao difficulty in procuring beer from accused, «who were selling it at Is 6d a bottle-. . They purchased it. at 2s a gallon. It was their custom to take a stock of liquor into their homes on the Saturday, and then go out into the streets on tho Sunday, and dkpose of it to thirsty sou)?. The magistrate entered a conviction in each of " M'Lebd's cases, accompanied with a total fine of £10, with costs (14s). The penalty for- default on both charges was 21 daW 'imprisonment. • *■*-- Robert" Wilson pleaded " Not guilty '* to-selling' beer-to Thomas Keliy. - - Constable Dempsey gave evidence that in company with Constable Kelly he met accused in College street last Sunday. Accused sold a couple of bottles of beer to- Kelly, and helped him and witness to drink the liquor. Later in the day .withers-, along with Constables Kelly, .Jones,' and M'Kelvey, executed a search warrant on accused's house. They found there two demijohns, two whisky bottles, and a mineral water bottle, all of -which had, contained liquor. - .- - The accused : " How do you know they contained liquor?" — " They smelt of it/ " May it not have been the sour smell of vinegar? — No. Do you know beer when you taste it ?—? — Yes. Does that bottle (produced) contain beer ? — Yes. How do you know? — I have tasted h^eer before. Are you expert enough to swear that the bottle does not contain some other liquid — vinegar, glycerine or dynamite ?—? — Yes. Sub-inspector Norwood stated that accused had been convicted three times previously. Wilson said he did not wish to ■ give evidence. Mr Riddel] informed accused that he was liable, to a maximum fine of £100 or a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months. He must know the risk he ran, and he had no excuse to offer. A conviction must be recorded, and in addition Wilson would be sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment with hard labour. The accused : Won't you allow an option, your Worship? Won't you give me seven days to pay ? The Magistrate : Call the next case, please.