MASTERTON LIQUOR CASES.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 669, 20 November 1909, Page 13

MASTERTON LIQUOR CASES.

A FINU OF £35.'' " , IDj Telccmph -l'roa* Aasorlatlon 1 , - v Masterton, November 19. At the Magistrate's Court this morning, boforo Mr. E. H. Turtdn, 6.M., tho adjourned case was taken, in which Frederick Secombo, Joseph Lynam, James Kingdom, and William o'ass.idy were charged with that, on October 21, they were found on tho premises of Bichard Haviland for the purpose pf 'illegally dealing in liquor, and in which .William E. Jones, Herbert Walter Jones, Charles Jones, Richard •Haviland, and Emily Haviland, were charged nith that, i between September 25 and October 21, they did keep liquor for sale in the Noliconse district of Masterton. , '. It will be romembered that tho case was adjourned at tho request of Mr. C. A. Pownoll (counsel for ,the defence) in ordor that he might bo 'given'an opportunity to call the evidence,of a witness named Sievers who, it was alleged, owned the keg of beer found on the premises, and merely kept it there for his owir convenience. Counsel,also raised the point" that the mere fact of anyone ordering any quantity of liquor did not cast upon thorn any onus. > 'After hearing considerable-evidence tho Magistrate said that the use against Haviland waa that sovqral people had been seen going in and oat of tho ■ houso at night and, on one occasion at least, a man camo out in an intoxicated condition.. There was no doubt that Haviland had had largo quantities of liquor sent to the house, nnd tho explanation that ho gave was that the liquor was consigned by his friends and his friends' frionds. Mr. Turton stated that he was not prepared to accept tho evidence, of the defence in , this connection. ' He was of opinion that tho house was a placo'wherea good deal of traffic in liquor was done,, end he was not prepared to believe that any person,would obtain largo quantities of liquor, and give it away to his friends and his frionds , friends. Haviland would consequently be convicted and fined £3o and costs £3 6s. Judgment was' held i over in the other casee till Friday pending tho lodging of an appeal on tho ground that tho mere fact of defendant ordering a quantity of liquor did not throw upon him the onus-of proof. The case against Charles Jones was dismissed, and Mr. Pownall contended that tho case against Mrs. Haviland should bo dismissed on the ground, that, as a wife, she was under the compulsion of her husband. <" The Magistrate intimated that he would consider tho point, and would decide on it when tho other cases-came on.