CHINESE AND OPIUM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18131, 1 July 1922, Page 11

CHINESE AND OPIUM.

FOUND IN POSSESSION.

LEGAL ASPECT RAISED.

In the Supreme Court* in Wellington this week, before the Chief Justice (Sir Bobert Stoat), two Chinese named Hing Fun and Git Ton appealed against their convictions and fines imposed by Mr. F. K. Hunt, in the Magistrate's Court. Appellants were represented by Mr. E. G. JeJlicoc, Mr. A. Fair, Crown Solicitor, appearing for tho collector of customs.

The Orientals, according to the evidence, had been found in possession of a quantity of opium, contrary to the provisions of the Opium Act. Hing Fun nad been fined £50 and Git Ton £25 in the lower court. The grounds of the appeal, in the cane of the former appellant, were that tlo opium in question had been stolen by some person from the Crown, and as, admittedly, the opium had been in the lawful possession of the Crown, to be found in possession -of it was not an offence under the Opium Act. During the course of Mr. Jelliooe's argument, His Honor intimated that, apparently, by the amending Act of 1910. it was made a specific offence for a Chinaman to be found in possession of opium »t all in a state fit for smoking, wheher it bad been unlawfully imported or not. It was, therefore, said His Honor, not essential to show that the opium had been unlawfully imported, nor was it any answer to show that it was legally held in the country. In the case of Git Ton,, which was almost identical with the foregoing, the opium had been discovered on the premises of the appellant during the execution of a search warrant under the Gaming Act. Prosecuted originally for allftgedy keeping a gaminghouse, it was contended by Mr. Jellicoe that the proceedings under the Gaming Act prevented proceedings being taken for alleged possession of opium. At tho conclusion of Mr. Jellione's argument, His Honor intimated that he desired to hear a reply only on the question as to whether or not it was necessary to show that the appellant was &ware of the illegal origin of tho, opiura. To this. Mr. Fair replied that the cases cited by Mr. Jellicoe to establish such a proposition applied only to prohibited importations, such as soft goods, sugar, or articles of ordinary currency. In the case of the Opium Act, contended counsel, the onus had been thrown on the defendant to show where the opium had been obtained, and for what purpose. His Honor reserved his decision.