ILLICIT WHISKY FINE OF £5OO IMPOSED

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24271, 31 May 1944, Page 4

ILLICIT WHISKY FINE OF £SOO IMPOSED

DISTILLATION ACT BREACHES

A fine of £SOO, In addition to the payment of expenses, which included counsel’s fee, £lO 10s, and analyst’s fee. £2 2s. was imposed on Clarence Seaton Thomas, of 81 Palmers road, North Beach, by Mi E. C. Levvey, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when Thomas was charged by the Collector of Customs with breaches of the Distillation Act, 1938. Four charges had been preferred against Thomas, the first being that he had in his possession the following apparatus:— three thermometers, one saccahromeler, three lengths of rubber hose, one copper measure, tin funnel, two 40-gallon drums of wash, and one 40-gallon drum part full of molasses, suitable for the process of distillation. The second charge was that he had an interest in the apparatus; the third that he was concerned in unlawfully making spirits contrary to section 116 (2B) of the Distillation Act, 1908, and the fourth that, not being the holder of a brewer’s licence, he carried on the business of a brewer, contrary to the Finance Act, 1915.

Mr A. W. Brown appeared for the Collector of Customs and Mr D. W. Russell for Thomas.

Mr Brown said it had been agreed that only the third charge should be proceeded with, as the others were merely alternative and he asked leave to withdraw the first, second, and fourth charges. Accused pleaded guilty to the charge of being concerned in unlawfully making spirits. In outlining the case for the prosecution, Mr Brown said Thomas had been charged under the act which forbade the making of spirits Accused for some time had been employed by Ballin Bros., Ltd,, but had given up his occupation and had gone to live at Palmer’s road, North Beach, where he had set up as a poultry farmer Customs officers had instituted inquiries, and had visited the residence in Palmers road, in company with members of the police force, and had made a search. In a shed at the back of the house there was found certain apparatus and a quantity of spirits. Defendant had made no objection to the search. Stored in the shed and house were 33 bottles of whisky labelled in the usual way as Robert McNish whisky. Labels and caps were also found, besides 10 bottles of clear liquor, apparently gin, also a four-gallon demijohn of whisky. The Magistrate; Do you mean whisky or what to-day they call whisky? Five Bags of Sugar Found Mr Brown said the searchers also found five bags of sugar on the premises and two 40-gallon drums of wash and another drum partly filled with molasses. Labels for “McDonald’s Whisky, bottled in Scotland," and "McNish/s, bottled in Christchurch,” were found, besides a quantity I of metal caps. A quantity of matured | whisky was found under a bed, and a number of gallon jars had been hidden in a potato patch behind the house. A customs officer had found In the house letters and telegrams, the contents of which clearly indicated that Thomas was engaged in the business of distilling whisky. The telegrams were signed “Hoho.” The letters came from someone who signed himself “Vince Davies,” another man, who apparently was the hidden principal, and had exercised control, for his letters included instructions as to what to do, and full directions as to the making of spirits. There were also found plans and a sketch of a heater When interviewed by the police, defendant had made a statement that he was carrying on as a poultry farmer. For a time he had worked at Ballins. There he had found the labels tucked away in pigeon holes. He had then commenced dealing in whisky which he said, had come from Mataura and other places. All he was concerned in was that it was made in Southland, and he only bottled it. He received a weekly wage of £5 for purchasing and selling for men named Davies and Bernie Trainer. He had passed some of the labels on to other persons. He had denied having a still. The police, said Mr Brown, had been unable to find the worm of the still. Thomas had denied making whisky, but in Court he now admitted being concerned in the making of spirits. He said that he had made 400 gallons of beer, but it was plain from an examination of the work that it was not for beer but for spirits. Thomas had purchased sugar, apparently on the “black market ” He said he had bought the molasses for his cows, but it was quite plain that it had been used for other purposes. His statement ta the police was the truth but not the whole truth. Analyst’s Report The Government Analyst had examined a' 260z bottle containing a brownish liquid labelled “McNlsh’s whisky.” The bottle produced was the same as seen on the hotel shelves. He had also examined a bottle that was not labelled, and another bottle apparently contained gin The amount of spirit in the bottle labelled "McNish” was 73.3 per cent., or 27 points, under proof, while the unlabelled liquid showed 67.5 per cent, spirit. The “gin” showed 58.5 per cent, spirit. The whisky usually retailed showed from 65 to 75 per cent, proof spirit. The samples were definitely spirits in the meaning of the act, and the alcoholic content similar to that retailed in the hotels. To the gin was added glycerine, a .constituent of gin and added to sweeten it. One pamphlet secured dealt with wines and spirits and gave the various ingredients of the liquors sold. Mr Brown said that the act provided for a fine of not more than £SOO, with a minimum of £SO, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, and that all spirits and material must be confiscated. The letters found showed -that one of the principals was Vince Davies (“Hoho”). The letters were not dated, but contained directions as to the procedure in obtaining sqgar and general reference to the business that had been carried on. Near the house had been found a large quantity of grain that had been thrown out. It was apparent that the business had been in operation for some time. The heap was 12 feet square and 18 inches deep. The Magistrate: I notice there is a drawing of a still. A very good sketch, indeed. Case for Defence Mr Russell said he was at a disadvantage in that ne had not had experience in dealing with this class of offence. His client was a married man with one child. He had taken on poultry farming and had not found it profitable. He had listened to the suggestion of an outsider before adopting this business. * Thomas had been paid £5 a week and bonus, but had received no more than £SO out of the whole business. The liquor was brought to him from the train. There was no still, and his client had not objected to the search of his premises. He had been candid. The act of planting bottles amongst the potatoes was amateurish It was quite evident that Thomas was the “dupe” of some other person. Accused had been directed by some other person as to the method of procuring the sugar, and it was surprising that five or six bag? had been secured. The letters showed that some other person had supplied the recipes and the diagram of the still. The charges had been set down for hearing some time ago, but had been adjourned so that the principal could be arrested, and a warrant had been issued. It was strange that the labels had been found where all and sundry could find them, and it was also strange that no complaint that the labels had been taken was made. No report that the labels had been taken was made. As Mr Brown had said, the unknown principal was largely to blame. The directions on securing sugar, where to gel it, and what to do, showed that accused was the "dummy,” and his liability was not so great as was that of some other persons not before the Court —persons who might go unpunished. He was informed that the stuff came from Southland. Although marked "Bottled m Scotland.” It was a case in which accused should not be called on to shoulder the full responsibility. Accused had previously held a clean record.

The Magistrate: Is there no sign that other persons, warrants for whose arrests have been made have been arrested? Mr Brown; No. your Worship.

The Magistrate: These offences are grave at any time; at present they are doubly so, and cannot be condoned. The only thing that stops me from inflicting a term of imprisonment is the fact that accused might not be the actual principal. The fact that the still has not been found does not weigh very heavily. Accused is concerned in the making ■ of spirits. He is only partly concerned. He will be fined £SOO and ordered to pay all expenses, and forfeit all goods and utensils in his possession to the police.

Minor Fire.—Little damage was done by a tire which occurred in a small house at 34 Victoria street, New Brighton, yesterday morning. The Christchurch Fire Brigade wrs called out at 8.50 o’clock, and soon had the outbreak under control.