SLY GROG-SELLING PROSECUTIONS.

Evening Post, Volume LXVI, Issue 45, 21 August 1903, Page 6

SLY GROG-SELLING PROSECUTIONS.

A QUESTION OF JURISDICTION. fBT TELEGRAPH — PRESB ASSOCIATION.! INVERCARGfLL, 20th August. The proceedings in the Court at Gore to-day were somewhat unusual. On the previous day, when a series of grog-selling prosecutions in no-license districts began, it was noticed that the Invercargill Magistrate, Mr. S. E. M'Carthy, took the Bench, the reason assigned being that Mr. Cruickshank, S.M. for the district, was required as a witness. Mr. Neave, for the defence, asked for an adjournment, but Mr. M'Oarthy refused. On resuming to-day in the case against Holland for selling liquor in his hotel, Mr. Neave said he objected to the present constitution of the Bench. He was aware that Mr. Cruickshank had gone to Invercargill that morning to take Mr. M'Carthy's Court. He contended that Mr. M'Carfchy's recent remark in the Fortrose case — tha* in future if persons were convicted of sly grog-selling in a no-license district he would order imprisonment for the first offence — showed that he was biased in the exercise of his judicial function, and was likely to be carried away by political feeling. He suggested that the police calling Mr. Cruickshank by letter to give evidence was merely a dodge to secure Mr. M'Oarthy as Magistrate, and was an unwarrantable interference with the ordinary judicial business of the Court. It bore, he contended, only one interpretation — that the police desired to have Mr. M'Carthy hear these cases. Mr. Seddon had said Mr. Cruickshank was one of the ablest Stipendiary Magistrates in the colony, yet they were deprived of his services at the whim and freak of the police. In the face -of Mr. M'Carthy's predetermination to inflict imprisonment, accused persons were not getting, the benefit of a judicial mind, which they were entitled to. Inspector Mitchell said the Fortrose case was under the Act of 1881, whereas this prosecution was under the Act of 1895. Mr. Cruickshank was a material witness, and if necessary he would adjourn the cases for his evidence. Mr. M'Carthy said he had received a subpoena to produce the Gazette containing his appointment. This he looked on as a discreditable attempt to interfere with the course of jiistico, and he would refuse an adjournment. Mr. Neave then said he had applied to the Chief Justice for a writ of prohibition against Mr. M'Carthy adjudicating. The Magistrate said he would go on till stopped by the Supreme Court. Resuming after ,lunch, the Stipendiary Magistrate said he had been shown a telegram stating that proceedings were being commenced for a writ of prohibition, and it would be indecent for himj to go on until the motion was disposed •of by the Chief Justice. Therefore he adjourned the hearing till to-morrow afternoon. DUNEDIN, 20th August. In Chambers to-day an application was made for a prohibition against Mr. M'Carthy, S.M. at Invercargill, hearing a oharge of illegally selling liquor against James Holland, of Gore. The Chief Justice reserved his decision till next day. This Day. In dismissing the application for a prohibition restraining Mr. M'Carthy, S.M., from sitting at Gore to hear cases of alleged sly grog-selling, the Chief Justice said there was not the slightest ground for the suggestion that the Stipendiary Magistrate was biased. It looked like an attempt by James Holland to select his own Magistrate. There would be nothing like justice in the colony if such a thing were listened to for a moment.