LIQUOR RESTRICTIONS

Auckland Star, Volume XLIX, Issue 45, 21 February 1918, Page 6

LIQUOR RESTRICTIONS

IN NO-LICENSE AREAS

AX IMPOKTAOT CASE

(By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.)

WAIHT, this day.

A case of much importance to residents of no-license districts w&e heard in the Magistrate's Court, -when John Robson, Herbert Brunton, and Walter Weeks were charged with giving orders for liquor without notifying the person from "whom the liquor was purchased that it was to be taken into a no-license district.

Senior-Sergeanfc O'Grady stated that one defendant brought in one bottle of whieky and six bottles -of beer; another brought in one bottle of whisky and three .bottles of beer, and a third three •bottles of beer.

■Jlr. Jackson, for defendants, said, Recording to tlie Act, it was quite clear that a person could legally bring a quart of whisky and a gallon ofj 'beer in. any one day into a no-license district- He contended that these men had brought this liquor in under the full belief that it was a legal "practice; The magistrate said that in the nolicense districts in which le had experience no restrictions were put on persons who brought in small quantities. In these districts in email quantities, as stipulated in the Act, were not asked to label or report such purchases.

The sergeant pointed out that a man could, according to the present interpretation of the Act, 'bring liquor into a no-license district every day. The magistrate said he would look into the and give a -written decision next court day.

James T. Inglis, Hotelkeeper at Thames, was fined 10/, with costs, for sending liquor into Waihi improperly addressed in regard to the contents of the package.