WHISKY STILL CASE

Evening Star, Issue 21717, 11 May 1934, Page 13

WHISKY STILL CASE

M'RAE AND SON ACQUITTED [Pea United Pbbss Association.] INVERCARGILL, May 10. A verdict of not guilty was returned to-day by the jury in the cas© in which William Allan Alexander M'Rne and his son, William Robertson M‘Rae, of Dunsdnle, fanners, were charged with being concerned in unlawfully making spirits, and the accused were discharged, Counsel for live defence (Mr Eustace Russell), in his address to the jury, said that there was not a tittle of direct evidence against either of the accused. The new still, which was of excellent construction, was extraordinarily well concealed, and the smoko was carried away by a long funnel into the bush. The accused said that they aid not know the still was there. An area of old ploughed land had reverted to practically a batten state, and, therefore, the M‘Raes would seldom have occasion to go there for feeding stock. Counsel submitted that whoever used the still worked at night. Evidence of this was found in a lantern discovered at the still. There was no positive proof such as analysis to show that any of the whisky found was illicit whisky. He commented on discrepancies in the police evidence regarding the identity of milk cans produced in court. In reply, the Clown Prosecutor (Air H. J. Macalister) said it had been proved that there Was a large still in full operation within eight chains of the accused’s property. It was insulting the intelligence of the jury to suggest that there was any doubt that the still was used for the making of whisky. Then there was the evidence that an old still had been found on the accused’s property. It was precisely similar in design to the other still. Doubts had been cast whether the whisky _ found was really “ Hokonni.” if the jury took the bottle in court to the jury room and tested it in any way thsy liked they would have no doubts.