SLY GROG-SELLING.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 November 1916, Page 6

SLY GROG-SELLING.

TOLICE RAID AT MOKAU, LIQUOR KEPT FOR SALE, BUSHMAN AND WIFE FINED £25. Two residents of Mokau, George Christian Landt Jensen. and his wife, Sarah Jensen, were each fined £25 by Mr K. Haselden, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday for keeping l.quor for sale in a jio-license area. The information charged the defendants with keeping, on November ."i, two bottles of brandy, two bottles of whisky, aiid a bottle oi port wine for sale at Mokau, a. district situated within tli? proclaimed area. Sub-Inspectir Fouhy prosecuted. The defendents, who were represented by Mr. •J. H. Quilliam, pleaded not guilty." Counsel asked that the two cases be heard separately Sub-Inspector Fouliv objected, and the Magistrate said he could see no reason why the cases could not be heard together Mr. Quilliam admitted that Mokau was within tlis proclaimed area of the King Country. In outlining the case, Sub-Inspecto-r Foully said Constable McGregor bad been suspicious of the defendants' house for some time. On Sunday, November 5, he entered the residence, and armed with authority provided under the war regulation issued on August 21, he searched the premises. Two men were ir. (lie house at the time, and both bore o\idence of having taken liquor. Tho constable found the liquor described in the charge sheet. Constable T. H. McGregor, stationed at Mokau, deposed that t'h<* defendant! lived in a two-rooined house at Mokau, which was within the King Country nolicense area. The male defendant was a bushman whose work took him from his home a great deal. There were two children. For some time witness had seen evidence of drinking about the defendants' house, and no November 4, he saw on the coach a case of whisky addressed to G. C. L. Jensen, Mohakati::o, a settlement two miles on the Waitara side of Mokau. Next day witness entered the defendants' house and saw on the table a quantity of liquor. Two men were in the house. One, a halfcaste Maori, was intoxicated, and the other, a Maori, smelt of liquor. In answer to witness, Mrs. Jensen said the Natives had come to enjoy some music. Witness asked her if she had any other liquor, and Mrs. Jensen said there was » gcod drop left. When witness intimated he wanted to search the house, she asked h'm for his warrant. Witness replied thi.'. lie was acting under the War Regulations. As the result of the search witness found two bottles of whisky, two bottles of brandy, and a bottle of port Jvine. Except for one empty bottle, witness could not find any trace of the liiuor that had arrived on the previous dny. Witness took possession of the liquor he found. During his visit six persons came to the house. Witness aave the namjs of these. Some of them turned away on seeing witness, and others walked inside the premises. Mr?. Jensen denied having taken any money for the liquoor. She said two men had given her £1 for the use of the piano, and to pay for her daughter's music lesson. Some days later, the two defendants called at the Police Station, and asked that the liquor that he had taken from them be returned. Witness refused to hand 'the liquor over. The case of whisky previously referred to was addressed as though it had come from Goldwater. New Plymouth. To counsel: The coachman brought the case of whisky through Mohakatino to Mokau, and it was taken oft' the coach and carried in the direction of Jensen's hoiise. He afterwards saw men go to the house and leave it.

Counsel: Are you sure it it a tworoomed house?— Yes. Counsel: Are there not four rooms?— There is a bit of a scullery. Counsel: You searched only two rooms and the scullery?—l searched the lot. Die constable and Jensen drew rough plans of the house, and the two were compared by the Magistrate, who said the constable's was the better one. Counsel: How far did you say Moliakatino is from llokau?—Two miles. Counsel: Are you sure it is not four miles?—l don't think so. The Magistrate: It depends whether voir go bv motor or by foot. (Laughter.) Counsel: Yes, it's longer by foot. (Renewed laughter). To counsel: Defendant was the worse for liquor when witness entered the iiouse on the Sunday. He was usually a hard drinker. He did not want witness to take the liquor away, and in order to pacify him witness said he would return it when defendant was sober. Harry Ellis, licensee of the Urenui Hotel, which was said to be the nearest public house to Mokau, produced a series of orders of liquor which he had received from Mr. and Mrs. Jensen. These included 10 bottles of whisky and one dozen bottles of beer, ordered during September and October. Sub-Inspector Fouhy compared these orders with copies that had been forwarded to the police. On October 2S witness sent four bottles of whisky to Mrs. Jensen.

Abraham Goldwater, wine an 3 spirit merchant, of Now Plymouth, produced five orders for liquor received from defendants, These were:—September IS, one ease liquor; October 3. one case liquor; October 12, one case mixed whisky and brandy; October 20, one case of whisky; November 3, nine bottles of wh<skey, two bottles of brandy, and one bottle of port wine. In opening the case for the defence, counsel accounted for the large quantity of liquor received by his client by statin™ that in a settlement situated as Mokau was people were in the habit of indulging fai more freely in liquor when it was available than they would if they Uvea in a town where there were licensed houses. The liquor had to be ordered in large quantities owing to the distance it had to be carried. When the coach arrived at the place, it soon became known there v as liquor on it, and when the liquor was carried to Mr. Jensciif" house, numerous friends of his, many of whom had worked at one time or another for him, gathered round and "inquiied after the state of his health." One could imagine the scene, -idded counsel. With free-handed hospitality, th« defendant gave himself up to an orgy and invited others to take part in it. However serious the social error might have been, however, counsel contended, no crime or offence had been committed. Had the constable made a thorough, search of the place, he would have accounted for every bottle contained in the case that had arrived the day before. defendant said he was a bush-con-tractor working at Mohakatino. His W'fc lived at Mokau in a four-roomed house, and witness went home at regular intervals. On November i a case of

liquor arrived at defendant's house at Mnkau. It had been addressed to Moha katino. After the arrival of the liquor, a number of men in the settlement, all of whom had, at one time or another, been employed by witness, gathered ;<■ tl-.e house and were invited to help themselves to the liquor. He staled positively I hat he did not sell any of the liquor, It had been witness' custom to keep liqucr for his own use and for the use of men who were working for him, and who might need it. When the liquor arriveu on November 4 witness Iml nv o botties, and five bottles remained in the ease. The Magistrate questioned defendant co' cerning his earnings and the particulars: of the last contract ac had had. Defendant said lie was at present engaged on day labor and earning Is Gd per hour and hi% board. The Magistrate: What is the object oi >'oni generosity ?—I have a free heart, I suppose. The Magistrate: It is not tisual for a German to be so generous to British, is it,—-Don't call me a German. I am a Dane.

The Magistrate: I thought you said you were a German!—No, no; i was referring to my third name. The Magistrate: So you say it was your free heart that caused you to bs so generous?— Yes. Sub-Inspector Fouhy: Have you the means to be so generous with your liquor?— Yes, I can afford it. Sub-Inspector Fouhy: Wc.e you noi sued for £l7 recently?— Yes, but that was paid at once. Siib-Inspector Fouhy: Was that the only civil summons you have had lately] —The only one of importance. To counsel: I didn't know my wife had any liquor in the house for several days subsequent to the Saturday. She gave me a nip when I felt I wanted one, Counsel said he would not call the second defendant. The Magistrate said the defendant,! had not discharged the onus that had been cast upon them. They would both be fined £2.3 each, in default two Months' imprisonment. The liquor would be confiscated and handed over to the hospital. He said the Crown would pay its own costs. The Magistrate, asked whether the defendants could pay the fines at once, and counsel intimated they could not. Mr. Haselden asked if they had any goods that- could be subject to distraint, if not, he would commit them to prison. Counsel asked for time. The Magistrate finally decided to sign the warrant of commitment, and instructed that it be suspended for a fortnight.