RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2514, 21 August 1888, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

' • Saturday. — (Befi.ro Captain Jackson, R.M., and Mr Mandeno, J.P.) SLY GROG SELLING : POLICE V. EDMUND PERIIY. Mr Hay appeared for defendant. Inspector Goodall prosecuted. Defendant was charged on the information of Constable Bsrrimnn with having committed a breach of the Licensing Act on 15th July, 18S8, by selling intoxicating liquor to one John Cavanagh, at Te Kniti, the Bnid Edmund Perry not being a licensed person under the Act. Defendant pleaded not guilty. John Cavanagh deposed that ho was a constable stationed at Tauranga. On 13th July he came to Te Kuiti, and put up at defendant's boarding-house, where he remained till the 15th. On that evening he met Donald Ferguson, Titclmer and Christie there. Asked them to have a drink. Asked for the same as he had before. It was understood that everything was to be asked for as ginger wine. They were supplied with four whiskies. Defendant went into the bedroom, and brought out the bottle about half full. Drank what ho was served with. It was whisky. Paid 2s for the four glasses of whisky. Ferguson had called for four drinks some little time previous. Christie called for wine, Fergusson called for hop beer, and Titchner called for ginger wine. Witness said that on the 14th a man named Mohr »sked him to have a drink. Witness said he would have whisky. Mohr said if yon want whisky you must understand it is ginger wine. Defendant was present at the time. On 21st July Constable Berriman and witness, under search warrant, went into defendant's house, where they found a five-gallon cask about half-full of whisky. Witness sampled it on the spot. It contained whisky. After the seizure witness took the keg to the police station. On the 16th asked defendant for °a whiskjt Defendant said he had none, only a bottle that he got up for his child's birthday. On the 21st July f«und a bottle of beer in defendant's bedroom. A case of stout was found in the bar under the counter. Thought it was stout, but had not tasted it. By direction of Inspector Goodall witness tasted the stout; he also sampled th; bottle of beer in the Court. —Cross-examined by Mr Hay: Was recommended to go to Mr Perry's. Told him he was in search of work.

Mr Hay : Was that not a lie? Witness : No it was not. I applied for work and got it. Liked a glass of good whisky sometimes. Did not like too much of it. Did not sample the whisky every day. Was quite sure that Mohr mado the statement with regard to calling for ginger wine. Did not know there was a birthday party on the 11th. Heard of a party on Kith. Mr Perry did not shout whisky for witness on 14th, because it was his child's birthday. Did not remember hearing Mr Perry say, when Constable Berriman said the contents of the cask were like whisky. " Yes, Constable Berriman, it is whisky, and very good whisky too." A. W. Titchnor deposed Iβ beinir piesent and seeing drinks served. Witness and another took some hop beer. As he did not taste the contents of tho other glasses, ho could not positively say what they had to drink. Asked for ginger wine, and so did the others. Was not prepared to say it was not ginger wine. Would not undertake to eay it was not whisky. Cross-examined by Mr Hay: Was not prepared to say it was not ginger wine he drank. By the Court: Called for ginger wine and expected to get it. Got ginger wine before there, and had no idea he was not being served with ginger wine. By Mr Hay : Could not say the second drink he took was not whisky, but to the best of his belief it was ginger wine.

Alexander Christie: Remembered the night of 15th July. He, Fergusson, Titchner, and Cavanagh went to defendant's. Drinks were called in, and witness had a glass of grape wine. The others had beer and hop beer he thought. He believed their drinks came out of a cask in the bar. As he did not taste what the other had, he could not swear what kind of they had. When they were about to go home, Caranngh asked them to have another drink. One of them called for ginger wine, and the others said they would have the same. All had the same drink. It was all poured out of one bottle. Filled his glass with water and drank it. Asked for ginger wine and expected to get it. Saw Cavanagh tender payment, which was accepted by defendant. Donald Fergusson made a similar statement to that of tho last two witnesses. Edmund Perry, deposed to remembering 15th July, Ciivanagh and the other witnesses were in his house. They asked for ginger wine and he served them. Had no reason to think it was anything else. They did not say it was anything else. Cavanagh paid for the drinks. Do not sell whisky. By Mr Hay: Did not hear Mohr tell Cavanagh that if he wanted whisky he was to ask for ginger wine. There is no such arrangement at his boarding house as that. Had the whisky in his house for a couple of months, gave some to his friends on his child's birthday (certificate of birth put in). Got it for his own use and not for sale. The stout was got for witness's wife who works hard and whose health required it. Did not keep ginger wine in his bedroom. Kept some whisky there for his own use. By Inspector Goodall: Would not swear it was not whisky he supplied, to the best of his knowledge it was ginger wine.

John Mohr (a German) deposed that he could not positively swear to Cavanagh's identity. If he had the same clothes on he oould identify him. Tho moustache wae the same. He was the same thin sort of rascal. Inspector Goodall here drew his Worship's attention to thn expression "rascal." Witness apologised. He was a foreigner. Did not mean any offence. Did not tell Cavanagh that if he wanted whisky ho should call for ginger wine. If he did he would have told a d — lie. The Bench decided not to take any more evidence from this witness as he was evidently the worse of drink. The Court adjovrned for fifteen minutes.

On returning the R.M. said that after consulting with his brother justice they decided to convict but would hear a further charge against the same defendant. Defendant declined to plead cruilty. The evidence in this case was similar to that in the former ease. Matthew N«il being the witness for the prosecution. He was unable to recollect what passed on that •particular occasion. John Mohr another witness, was unable to appear in the witness box. The Bench reserved judgment in this case till Monday morning. There was another information for the same offence against the defendant, but this was withdrawn as were also four informations of the same nature against Edith Perry, wife of the defendant. Samuel Kenuard pleaded guilty to a similar offence. Judgment reserved till Monday morning. Yesterday the Bench gave judgment, and fined Perry £7 10s in each case with costs, £<"> 18s, the liquor to be confiscated, and a distress warrant to issue in default with 14 days' hard labour. The money was paid. Kennarsi was fined £5, and costs, 14s Gd, with same alternative.