SLY GROG-SELLING.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 12472, 1 October 1902, Page 7

SLY GROG-SELLING.

! PROSECUTIONS AT OPHIK. . j At the Police Court, Ophir, on. September 24, I | before Mr J. M'Ennia, S.M., several charges i j of sly grog-selling weire preferred against dif-' ■ j ferent accused.-.' The first case called was that against Peter Morrisy, of Poolburn, who was ' charged with having unlawfully sold intoxicating liquor at Mamiherikia on the 14th of • last month. Inspector O'Brien prosecuted on behalf of the police, and Mir A. C. Hanlon . (Dunedin) and Mr J. K. Kirk (Naseby) appeared , . for tho defence. On the application of Mr j Hanlon, all witnesses weije ordered out of court. The first witness called was David Alexander 1 Buchan, who stated that be was a, storekeeper before he went to work on the Otago Central | railway line. Remembered the 14th of last ■ month. Went to.Morri&y's tent with Charles ' . Jopson. About 10 minutes past 8 asked ' j Morrisy for a drink. Ho supplied witness with a glass of beer, and Jopson helped him- , I self to a claret. Claret was in a dark bottle ; \ behind a. sort of counter. ' Morrisy produced . the bottle, and Jopson helped himsel-f. Gave . Morri3y two single shillings and received back 6d. Morrisy had a claret too. The glaaa of beer was filled behind the counter and placed on the counter ful}, ! To Mr Hanlon: Witness came to this dis- ■ trict about four years ago. He liked doing 1 informing work. He was not doing it for lova ■ of it, but for the benefit of the wives and i families of the men on the line. Be drank • occasionally, but never got drunk. Had sonao i money a month ago, but spent it in board for i Jopson and himself, who were living tcgethei- , Ho spent the £15 in a month. He had to have a drink now and again. He l'emeuvboruci , being sued by Gilchrist, who had not vet been . paid. He got a coat from Jennings, but had , not paid for it. He had been staying with ( ! Mrs Duck at Drybread, but had not paid her. j He had gone over his evidence with Jopson ' j before the case- started, and went through the ; whole -story. He told Jopson that Mr Hanlon | would be " getting on to him." Had no con- . versation with Jopson as to wives- and families » on the line before they got the drink. He i was not drunk on August io, but was carting aq'soi- on that day and opened it with the ■ consent of tho owner. He drank very little of it\ He would swear that he was not drunk : when he went into Glenn's. He did not remember Glenn helping Jopson into liis trap. He left Glenn's about 9 o'clock and got to Healy's between 1 and 2 o'clock in the morning. It was about 10 miles from Ida Valley , to Poolburn Gorge. He told Gilchrist he would pay him when the prosecutions wero over, but he did not remember saying he would get something out of them. He expected' something, and thought he would get half the fine. He thought of getting as much as possible out of the cases and then leaving the district. Jopson agreed. It was after all the sales had talven place that they thought of the wives and children—about a day after. Then they , went and informed the police. It struck him as being a mean and contemptible thing to do, and he was, very sorry he did it, as tho money likely to be got was not worth it. He told tine police and Jopson that he was very sorry he had anything to do with it. , He never looked at the cn.sk of beer when ho got to Healy's. Healy lifted down the cask himself. He did not .rem-ember shouting out. ■ They were not singing and carousing. He nad never seen Jopson drinking ciaret before this occasion ft Morrisy's. Jopson had soino cartridges after he I left Evans's. Re-examined: Evans gave hira permission to ' broach the cask. They helped themselves to one drink, so .far as he could remember, but they gave some to Glenn. He wa-s sober at Morrisy's house. I Charles Jopson ,deposed that he was a, labourer. He knew'defendant, a,nd remembered seeing him ou the 14th in Mb tent at Mamiherikia. Witness corroborated what the former I witness hud said in- his exaniinatioii-in-chief To Mr Hanlon: Witness had tried at other places for grog. He made up his mind on ' • Sunday to go for a- prosecution. They had a ' barrel of beer with them. 'Ho reckoned they had Wa-ldron " good " when they came out cf > his place. Then they arranged to go to Glenn's. I Ho reckoned they had Glenn " pretty good." I ' He could neither read nor write. Went to i Waldroa's with bread. They hud not then s made up their minds to give Waldron away if i he gave them a drink. 'They made up their , . minds after coming out oi Glenn's, when they . ' said they would try the lot, us they reckoned . j they were taking away money which ought to

have gone to tho wives and children of the men. He was never drunk in his life. They had a barrel of beer with them, arid had bear out of it coming from Evans's to Waldron's. He did not remember being lifted into the oa,rt. Ho could not tell how many drinks ho had. He had no ammunition. He did not remember having either rifle or cartrMges. It would have boeix untrue if he had told Bucnan he had cartridges. Ho would have remembered had firing taken place, but ho did not remember. They left Evans's some time after dinner—he did nob remember whether after tea or before tea. They got to Waldran s boforo dark, but ho did not remember whether lights were burning. He did no* remember Buchan and himself talking thfe matter over or discussing the possibility of getting anything out of tbo- psxs-yutions. He did not know whether Buchan was truthful or r.ot. He stayed at Miller's one night, and Buchan paid for what he had. He intended to payMrs Duck, who would yet be paid. He might have been under the influence of drink on the Sunday, but ho did not mind'whether he was pretty far gone. They got bo Healy'ft some time in the morning. Tho distance from Ida Valley to Poolbum was about foul or five miles* It took thorn from half-past 8 o clock till half-past 1 to get to Healy's. He did not remember going to sleep. They did not pull up on the road, so far as ho could remembw, and he did not remember whether they walked or rode. He had a few words with Buchan about the case that morning. (Here witness burst into tears, and. completely breaking down,'had to be carried out of court) ' William Arthur Matthews, constaoleat Poolburn, stated that on the 19th of this month he executed a search warrant at Morrisy's. He found no drinking vessels inside the tent, but outside there was a laig© demijohn with the neck broken off, and in a covered van used by defendant there was an empty 10-gallon beer keg and about half a dozen tumbiers. _ This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Hanlon, in addressing the bench, submitted that at this 'stage the case should be dismissed. It would be monstrous and a travesty on justice for a conviction to be sustained on the contradictory evidence of the two informers, who, as they had themselves shown, had hfid beer with them on their rounds, and had indulged in it too freely. The evidence should bo weighed with care and caution, and it would be tound that absolutely no case had been established against the accused. < In concluding an eloquent flpneal to the,bench, Mr Hanlon stated that the defence! d L not intend to call any evidence, btit would stand or fall on the evidence for the prosecution. His Worship commented on the very contradictory and unsatisfactory'statements of the informers, and stated that he could not possibly convict on it. The sale had' not been proven, and the information must be dismissed. John Davis was then charged with navmg, on the 12th day of August last,. at Poolbum Gorge, unlawfully sold intoxicating liquor—to wit, beer.—lnspector O'Brien prosecuted for the police, and Messrs A. C. Hanlon and J. R. Kirk defended. David Alexander Buchan stated that, with Charles Jopson and John Hamilton, he. waa present at accused's tent, and asked him for a drink. Witness shouted for four, and was supplied with four drinks—whisky. The whisky was taken from the side of the bed by accused; There were two glasses on the table, and witness found two more in a box cupboard and brought them out. Davis poured out. the drink, and each had one. Witness, paid accused two single shillings. To Mr Hanlon: Went to Davis's because did not want to make fish of one' and flesh of another. He was a bit thirsty. He had break-' fast about half au hour before going m. He went in to have a drink, and would not have gone in had it not been that they Were thirsty; He went in to induce defendant to sell liquor The object"wa& to trap him and give him away. Witness admitted that it was a dirty thing to do. He thought they were going to make a haul. Jopson took notes. Witness said something about his, and Jopson aaid something about his, but added nothing at all. Jopson told witness he had written them down. He would positively swear he had these notes. He had notes about each case. Witness tooic notes of Glenn's the day after they had been at his place. He produced his hote.-book He thought he picked the note-book up about the road somewhere a good while ago. The principal parts of the notes were about the cases. He had had it in his pocket about 32 months. He picked it up in Poolburn Gorge, a perfectly new book. He took the notes so as to refresh his memory.. It was not until after they got the first five that they made up their minds to give away the sellers. He could not say when he made the notes in this case. He could not recollect asking Jopson to make notes. Jopson's book had a purse. Witness knew Jopson could read. He did not write the notes in Jopson's book for him. He was quite sure the drink was whisky, and he told Constable Matthews the drink was whisky. (Here the information was amended on the application of the police.) Jopson showed no signs of being under the influence of drink. He had a. conversation with him that morning, but could not recojlect if he said anything about the case. Jopson read his notes to witness, and witness read Ms to Jopson. Jopson had his notes with, him, and'was prepared to adhere to all the evidence which he gave in the former case, and he would make the same «.nswer if the questions were repeated. He-examined: He could not say whether he had ever seen Jopson writing. Charles Jopson corroborated the evidence-in-chief given by Buchan, and stated that he had a small pocket-book, which he produced to the court.—(Mr Kirk objected to the book being opened, as witness did not require to refresh his'm'emory; and the book was left on the court table a* this .stage"unopened.) He never wrote In the. book, but somebody else did for him. To Mr .Kirk: He did not .remember want they had for breakfast; but he .was- a bit thirsty He.did nob remember about what time they had breakfast. He did not know the name of. th« other man who was with them—-he had foigotten it. He could neither read nor rfrite. Buchan must have been wrong if he ■ stated, witness could read. He had notes of the cases. A lady friend made them for him. He got Buchan's book, and.they made up Viw note 3 ftoni them. He could not say when they were written. Mr Kirk here produced a paper -to witness with some words on it, and, being pressed, the witness read some of the words. I'he crossexamination then elicited answers somewhat similar to those given in Morrisy'a case, and witness stated that he would, adhere to all the evidence, excepting that which, had been corrected, given by lam in the former case. Constable Matthews gave evidence as to executing a search warrant, und finding liquor on the premises; and Inspector O'Brien intimated that tho case for the proseoution was closed, , Mr Hanlon submitted that in this case also the information must bo dismissed. The evidence was of the same unreliable, unworthy, and unsatisfactory character 'as that in the last case. No reliance could be placed on tho contradictory statements of the informers, and no bench could possibly convict. His Worship held that the charge had not been sustained and dismissed the information. The court adjourned at ti p.m., and on resuming at 7.30 p.m. the cases against Margaret Kennedy, James Glenn, William Waldron,, d.nd Patrick Healy were cailed.—Mr Hanlon and Mr Kirk appeared to defend in each c*su. —Inspector O'Brien stated that in view of the decisions in the former cases he did not intend to offer any evidence, and asked leave to withdraw the informations.—Counsel for the defence offering no objection, the informations in each case were accordingly withdrawn Great interest was shown in the cases by the public throughout the proceedings, the courthouse being closely packed during tho whole of the hearing. The collapse of the witness Jopson under Mr Hanlon's cross-examination' m the first case caused'a little mild excite--nient, and created quite a dramatic situation. Most fervour, however, was shown sit the conclusion of the cases, counsel for the defence being loudly cheered.