LICENSING INQUIRY

Evening Post, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 63, 15 March 1945, Page 9

LICENSING INQUIRY

TE KAUWHATA STILL

ITS FUTURE USE

Mr. B. W. Lindeman, the Australian viticultural expert of the Agricultural Department, was closely examined by Mr. R. Hardie Boys, counsel for the New Zealand Alliance, before the Royal Commission on Licensing in Wellington yesterday, as to what use the Government's new still at Te Kauwhata, Waikato, was to be put. Counsel suggested that the new still there, which had a capacity of 800 gallons, had been installed by the Government in the expectation of establishing a distilling industry at least in brandy in the Dominion.

"I do not think that it was instituted with that object," Mr. Lindeman replied, "but when I recommended that the still be purchased I had it in mind that some day this country might distil brandy."

"Did you disclose that to the Department?" asked Mr. Hardie Boys. Witness: It would have made no difference because the same still could have been used for producing either fortifying spirit or brandy. There is no difference in the type of unit. If it were not now used to distil brandy it would have to be altered considerably.

The witness, when asked as to whether whisky could be distilled from the still, replied that it was far too small for that purpose. Though whisky was manufactured in Australia, no Australian distiller would consider a still of the type at Te Kauwhata. The still, he said earlier, had been selected as the most economic unit for the purpose in view, and it was the smallest unit that the Australian manufacturers would make.

Mr. Lindeman said he did not think that there was any danger of wine stills being used for the supply of spirits to sly-grog sellers. Wine, he added, had to be fortified in the presence of a Customs official, and he thought the present system of checking was adequate. It was true, he admitted in reply to another question, that he had examined wine in the Henderson district that was undoubtedly illicit, but he could not say where it had originated. Neither was he aware that wine in considerable quantities had been obtained by Maoris in the north from Dalmatian growers, though such a state o£ affairs was suspected.

Counsel: Does it justify the comment that you are encouraging something that you cannot control?—l would not say that. We are trying to improve the quality of New Zealand wines.

SLY-GROG SELLING,

Questioned further, he said it was true that New Zealand manufactured wine had been used by sly-grog sellers during the recent liquor shortage. The responsibility of his Department, he said, was to improve the quality, and not to control the sales of wine. If irregularities had been reported they would receive attention from the Department of Justice.

Mr. Lindeman did not agree that the obtaining of wine making licences had been used as "a cloak" by some growers in the north.

Counsel: A grower could, for example, make wine from rhubarb or parsnips, and do you say that is lawful? —Yes, I understand it is lawful, but I would not call it wine. In any case, my Department has no control over it.

"As there have been some thousands of gallons of wine unaccounted for," said counsel, quoting from figures relating to the industry, "is not the solution that they have been used for sly-grog selling?"

"I do not think so," the witness replied.