LIQUOR AT A PICNIC.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16851, 16 May 1918, Page 4

LIQUOR AT A PICNIC.

■ ■ - • . . -mm ALLEGED ILLEGAL SELLING. ' " ;, : M THE CHARGE DISMISSED. 1? The arrest of a man for drunkenness on a ~ recent Sunday led to the police ascertaining that he had obtained the liquor at a ":-'i launch picnic, and as a result Frederick R. v >; Mason (Mr. Buttle) was charged in the- '4* Police Court yesterday, before Mr. F. Y. « Frazer, S.M., with supplying liquor to ? t '. four men, without being the holder of a ; ??:5 license. . .Vv: Sub-Inspector Wohlman said defendant : f was the organiser of a launch picnic, and s apparently invited whom he pleased and collected 10s a head to pay for the launch food, and liquor. On the occasion in ques- - tion there were 32 paying guests, and others were present by invitation in return for services rendered in the past. Twenty gallons of beer was purchased by defendant from the Workingmen's Club. Defen- '] dant ws a man of good character, and it ' was not suggested he was a sly grog-eeller. Defendant was a member of the Workingmen's Club, and took delivery of the liquor ■ from the club on the Saturday. It wag ordered in his own name and not as agent •■ for the others, who were ignorant as to whence it came. Defendant had submitted an account showing the expenditure to be £12 19s 4d and the receipts £13, but the police computation of the receipts was £16, showing a profit of £3.

Members of the party gave evidence to the effect that there had been many such picnics, the arrangements for which were left in Mason's hands. The 10s. was understood to include everything, and the beer, which it was understood would be there, was regarded as belonging to the party, and not to Mason. As a rule, the same party went out, but occasionally members of the party brought a guest, who would not be charged anything. Defendant, an accountant, said he made no profit out of the picnics, and the cost was equally divided. It was incorrect that 32 paid; 26 was the correct number, which at 10s each totalled £13. He did not organise the picnics, the others merely asked him to order the liquor and food and arrange for the launch. If the party was not large enough, on no occasion would casual passers-by be touted for, but the picnic would be postponed if the others thought fees per member too high. The magistrate said if it had been shown that casuals were charged 10s it would have been an illegal act, but in this case it was a regular coterie of men who had the privilege of inviting friends as non-paying guests. It would also have been wrong if Mason had bought it for .himself, and then sold it again, but the evidence __ showed he bought it for the others, although each member of the party did not issue specific instructions to purchase the liquor. It might be close to the border line, but the scheme seemed to be worked on friendly lines. Thft charge would be dismissed.