SLY-GROG CASES.

New Zealand Mail, 21 February 1901, Page 42

SLY-GROG CASES.

A FINE IMPOSED IN ONE CASE. In the Magistrate’' Court on the 33 th William. Jillett' and George Sutcliffe were charged on three counts with having sold grog at Titahi Bay on the 2nd and 3rd January, they not being the holders of a do so. Sab-Inspector Wilson prosecuted, and Mr Menveath defended.

John Hughe-, a probationary constable, deposed that- he went out to Porirua in company with another probationer, named Hudson. They called at. a place there known as “The Club,” and saw Sutcliffe, who was in charge of it. They had two bottles of a. teetotal drink when they got there; later in the clay they were supplied with a drink of whisky by Sutcliffe. In the evening witness and his mate played cards with Sutcliffe and others. It was not stipulated beforehand that they were to play for drinks: but after the game, Dudson, who had lost, said he supposed he would have to pay for drinks. A man named George Franklyn lost later on. He “ shouted,” too. Witness had drinks with other persons on Sunday. Paid Sutcliffe 2s for them. Later in the day Sutcliffe served a number of drinks to witness and to others. Saw Sutcliffe bring whisky to the house the same day. He came from the direction of Jilleit’s house. Witness and a constable later on went across to search for liquor on the premises of Jillett. Showed the latter a warrant, and then made a search. Found tAvo cases of

“ A.K. J brand beer-—twenty-nine large bottles, twenty-eight small bottles,. and a two-gallon whisky jav, Avith about a pint of liquor in it, and eight empty whisky bottles. Also found whisky at Sutcliffe’s place

Cross-examined by Mr Menteath : Witness did not give his correct name when he called at the club. Said he was just out from the Old Country. The other constable said he was a. carpenter. It AA’as true there Avas a room fitted up like a room of a public house. Tb e bulk of the shelves Avas not covered Avith groceries : there Avere a feAv tins about. No one paid for the first Avhisky—it Avas giA-eii by the manager Sutcliffe. Would SAvear it Avas Avhisky—not golden aleAvhich avm.s sold to him after the game of cards. The men who partook of the drinks Avere named Sutcliffe, Whitehouse, Frankly n, Dudson aud Hughes (Avit-ness). Saw Dudson pay for the drinks. For the second lot Franklyn paid. On the Sunday morning Dudson asked Sutcliffe to give him some Avhisky in a bottle. He did not get it-. Jillett Avas not present when any of the drinks Aver© served. When coming away on Monday morning they had another drink, for Avhich Dudson paid. He paid it. in the bill. The amount Avas 225. To Sub-Inspector Wilson : The living expenses of witness and Dudson were 10s 6d each. The odd shilling on th e bill Avas for the two Avhiskies.

Hugh Angus Duldsoin, probationary constable, gave evidence agreeing AA’itli that tendered by Hughes. Cross-examined: Was certain it was whisky Avith which'he Avas supplied by the defendant Sutcliffe. When going back to Porirua on the Monday morning neither witness nor Hughes asked Sutcliffe for Avhisky in a bottle. Could not say avliv they had not reported before coming into Court that liquor Avas sold to them on the -u on day morning. Must haA T e forgotten auout it. Was perfectly clear that they ~ot two drinks on the Monday morning before leaving and that they did not ask for Avhisky in a bottle to tak e Avith them. Saw no other people there. Re-examined: Each man Avho called for whisky had it. poured out of the same bottle. William Hutton, police constable of Johnsonville, said he knew the' Titahi Bay Club. It was a newly-erected building OAvned by defendant Jillett. Jillett, on the 6th February, told witness that Sutcliffe Avas his manager. Went wit-h Hughes to Jillett’s house and searched it. Told Jillett his errand. Found the two cases of bottled beer (produced in Court) just behind the door. Told Jillette he Avas going to sample some “to see if it was the real McKay.” He' found it good and “ heady.” Also- found a small quantity of whisky in a large jar. Jillett told Avitness that a twogallon jar of Avhisky came there the previous night, and that it had been taken doAvu to tbe club. Jillett told witness he (Jillett) was the OAvner of the club. Found a jar of Avhisky, Avhich was addressed “ W. Jillett, passenger to Porirua.”

At this stage of the proceedings Air Menteath asked for an adjournment of the case, on the ground that lie had been taken by surprise by the form of the evidence for the prosecution. He had been informed that the police witnesses were only treated to soft drinks. Since the police had stated that two outsiders Aver© present and partook of the whisky he would like an adjournment of the case made to enable him to

produce the two persons referred to, Avhom he Avas instructed had partaken of nothing alcoholic. It had come on him as a .surprise Avhen the police spies had sAvorn that the men in question had been drinking Avhisky and beer vrirh them.

Sub-Inspector Wilson -aid -he Avon Id have offered no objection to a remand if it had been asked for in the first* place, but he thought it" hardly right that an adjournment should be asked; for after the police had closed their case. t

Dr McArthur, -S.M., said it Avas a; rather unusual course to take, but under the circumstances he Avould grant the adjournment asked for, on the undertaking gh’en by Mr -Menteath that, nothing AA'Ould be done to prejudice the case.

The cases brought by the police against William Jillett and George Sutcliffe for alleged sly-grog selling were continued at the Magistrate's Court on the 18th.

Mr Menteath informed the Court that as a result of the conference which he had had Avith the two persons mentioned by tlio police he had adA'ised his client Sutcliffe to withdraw his plea of not guilty. Th© allegations made by the police were not by a great deal admitted, but there remained a measiue of blame on the defendant Sutcliffe, Avho had been guilty of selling liquor against the expressed wish of his employer (Jillett), but under the mistaken idea that he was thereby adA'aneing his employer’s interest.

Dr McArthur, S.AI., said he Avas of

(Opinion that no evidence had been brought forward to connect the defendant Jillett Avith the offence. The defendant Sutcliffe Avould be fined £2O and costs, as he (Dr McArthur) felt that such offences must be severely punished Avhen detected.

Sub-Inspector Wilson pressed for a con Auction on each of the three charges. Mr Menteath objected that it was at the earnest solicitation of the police that the offences had been committed. A good defence, too, could have been made to the remaining charges; but he, had thought the police Avould abandon them Avhen the defendant Sutcliffe pleaded guilty to one charge.

Dr McArthur said he had meant the substantial penalty he had inflicted to all the charges. He could not see his Avay to inflict any further fine. SeAv Hong, the proprietor of a grocer’s and fruiterer’s shop at 121, Willis street, was charged with having sold beer to John Igoe on Sunday, the 10th instant.

The defendant, for whom Mr Skerrett appeared, pleaded not guilty. John Igoe stated that he visited the shop tof the accused on the date ticned in the information, in company with a friend named Michael Ryan. They obtained one bottle of beer, which, was consumed in the kitchen, for wnich one shilling Avas paid. The beer was obtained from a back room, by one of the Chinamen present, whom the defendant stated was a cousin of his (defendant’s). Witness: also paid 2s for tAvo more bottles, Avhich he and Ryan took aAvay with them. Did not notice the defendant in the room when the beer was sold. They were met outside by Detective Cox, Avho took possession of the beer. Witness stated he was a mariner. He had met the detective accidentally, not by arrangement, and Avas not employed by the police to A T isit the shop.

Michael Ryan corroborated the evidence of the previous Avitness as to visiting the defendant’s shop and obtaining the beer. Witness, Avho described himself as an iron moulder living in Manners street, stated there were some men end a woman in the shop when they visited it.

Detective Cox deposed to meeting the previous witnesses coming out of the defendants shop, at about 9.45 on the evening of Sunday, 10th instant. He searched them, and found they had each a bottle of beer in their possession. Armed with a Avarrant, he searched the premises, and found three bottles of beer and part of a bottle of gin. He also found about two dozen empty beer bottles in the kitchen. The defendant stated that the person who serA r ed the beer Avas a cousin of his. Mr Skerrett submitted there was no evidence of agency, and that the charge should therefore be dismissedHis Worship stated that although the man Avho sold the beer was alleged to be a cousin of the defendant’s, there was not sufficient evidence to connect the defendant with the offence. The charge would therefore be dismissed.