SLY GROG SELLING

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17273, 27 March 1918, Page 2

SLY GROG SELLING

TIIB PALMERSTON CASES. FINES TOTAL £160. A sequel to recent sly-grog raids by tho police was tho appearance of Jessio and William Moir, proprietors of tho Criterion Hotel, Palmeretou, before the local court yesterday, Mr J. 1L Bartholomew, S.M., presiding. 'lho first case called was that in whioh Jessio Moir was charged, under section 146 of the Licensing Act, with, on tho 15th, 16th, and 17th lust., at Palmerston, selling liquor in tho no-liccnse district o£ Oamaru, to ono James Lillico Stevenson.

Sub-inspector Mathieson (acting superintendent) prosecuted, and Mr W. G. -tlay appeared for both defendants, who aro husband and wife. When asked to plead, Mr Hay said that, as regards tho charge, ho, on the defendant's behalf, pleaded not guilty. He was not satisfied that as a matter of law there had ,not been some alteration in tho area of tho licenijo district, and there was probably a defence on that ground. 110 was not satisfied on that point. He could hardly, however, deny tho facts. He suggested that the charge bo amended by bringing ifc under section 195 of tho Licensing Act, which dealt simply with the soiling of liquor without a licenso. There was another provision under such a charge for a, punishment that would meet the case.

That courec would get over the difficulty as to tho law. Ho understood that the police wero not prepared to go on to provo the facts in tho absence of Sergeant Thomson, who had met with an accident, but if the information were amended in tho direction suggested by him (counsel) he was prepared to plead guilty. Sub-inspector Mathieson said he could not consent to tho procedure suggested by Mr Hay. The information was laid under section 146, sub-section 2 of tho Act, which provided for tho infliction of a term of imprisonment for a. eecond offence. Tho defondant had been convicted and fined for sly grog-selling on July 24. Also, if tho information were amended in the direction

suggested, he would bo prevented from bringing in that conviction in relation to tho penalty. Ho would therefore oppose the application. ■ His Worship What is tho defendant's age?

Mr Hay: She is 54 years of age, and has been in the dominion for 50 years. Continuing, Mr Hay urged as a further reason why the information should bo amended, that section 195 would givo tho bench tho option of imposing a fine in lieu of a term of imprisonment. There were reasons why this woman should not be sent to gaol. She was 54 years of age. Sho had three daughters, one of whom was still a school girl, and it was on these that the ignominy would fall. In addition to this, she had a son fighting in France. To his (Mr Hay's) mind, it would seem out. of tho true order of things that a mother should bo sent to gaol for an offenco of this nature, especially when he soil was at tho front. The punishment the bench had power to inflict under section 195 was sufficient to stop all this business. He (counsel) had explained to the defendant the serious position she had placed herself in, and he could assure the bench that it was her intention to get out of the business altogether. In fact, she had already taken steps to dispose of the property, and she purposed taking a farm in the Owaka district.

Tile Magistrate (addressing Mr Hay): Do yon say it is her intention to leave this particular place? Mr Hay replied that Mrs Moir had absolutely made up her mind to leave the house and the district. Of course, he added, there might be some difficulty in disposing of property at present. Apart from defendant's interest in the property, she was only possessed of some £200. Her husband was 65 years of age, and suffered from bronchitis.

Sub-inspector Mathieson said that, in view of what counsel for the defendant had said, it was only right that the court should be placed in possession of Mrs Moir's history. Ho thought he was correct in saying that it was-his Worship before whom she came in July, and on that occasion she was formally warned that if there was another conviction imprisonment would follow. That warning had made no difference in her ways. Drunkenness and drink were still in evidence about her plac6. Prior to her coming to Palmerston at all she was connected with sly grog-selling. In 1894, 1895, and 1896 both tho defendant and her husband were >before- the court at Balclutha. The husband was the active participant on these occasions. Ho was fined £50 on one occasion, and £10 on each of two others. In view of tho penalties inflicted on tho husband on these occasions the charges against the wife were not proceeded with. Both parties were described by tho police as defiant sly grog-sellers. The Magistrate: The only oonviotion against her is the one recorded here. The proceedings against her were withdrawn several times.

Mr Hay said that if the defendant was such a defiant sly grog-seller as the police contended she was, they should have no difficulty in defeating her. She had been in Palmerston for five years. Tho Sub-inspector said that discovery and detection were quite different. Mr Hay knew that quite' well His Worship said that Mr Hay had pointed out that the possibility of a legal difficulty was arguable, inasmuch as there might have been some alteration of the boundaries of the district since tho time when defendant was fined for a similar offence. Ho (Mr Bartholomew) was not deciding that point, and he would go no further at present than to say that it seemed arguable. He would simply deal with tho application eo to amend the charge as to give the option of a monetary penalty instead of imprisonment. In this connection stress had been laid on the woman's age; and on tho fact that the odium of imprisonment, if inflicted, would 1 fall on her family. It seemed to him that under section 195 he could impose such a monetary penalty as would act as a deterrent, especially as she was leaving the district. Under the circumstances he thought it proper that tho charge should be laid under section 195. The charges were then altered to one of selling liquor without a license, tho words "in a no-license district" being omitted. Mr Hay, on behalf of the female defendant, thereupon pleaded guilty to all tho charges. The Sub-inspector repeated what he had said about the previous conviction in Palmerston. Since that conviction, according to his information, there had been no diminution of drunkenness about the premises. His information was that tho defendant continued to sell liquor,. and there was no doubt that she had acted in a very highhanded way. The police had made several unsuccessful attempts to datch her. It was

not until Constablo Stevenson was sent from Dunedin on tho 15th that success attended their efforts. Constable Stevenson was supplied with liquor on that and the following day. On tho Saturday night the premises were raided by Sergeant Thomson and Constable Pardy, and they found one gallon jar of whisky 'full,'; two full bottles, and two nearly full, 167 empty whisky bottles, 33 empty beer bottles, 43 empty stout bottles, , two empty two-gallons iars. and an' empty 10-gallon keg. All tneso empty bottles and vessels boro cvidenc© of having recently oontained liquor. There were also three empty whisky cases. Mrs Moir again served Stevenson on the Sunday morninng. During tho time that Stevenson stayed in defendant's houso he had not been identified. It was not for him (tho sub-inspector) to suggest what penalty should bo imposed, but ho urged that it' should be substantial. Mr Hay said it would bo useless for h'im to suggest that tho penalty should be light —in fact, it should not be anything but substantial. He would, however, repeat that the defendant was leaving Palmerston. If she had carried on sly grog-selling on such a wholesale scale as waa suggested it would be assumed that tho defendant had made a lot of money. That was not, however, the case. Tho woman had practically nothing. Wherever she removed to she would havo to make a fresh start in ife. This wae in itself a sovere penalty for two old people. On that account ho asked his Worship to bo as lenient as possible on the defendant. As regards the number of empty bottles found on tho premises, Mr Moir had informed him that a la»ge number of these had boen bought from people in the district. The Sub-inspector: Wo have looked into that, and there is not a particle of truth in it.

Mr Hay said that was Mr Moir's statement. As regards the sale of liquor on the Sunday, the defendant had informed him 'that Constable Stevenson had complained of feeling unwell, and in consequence of his statement Mrs Moir had sap plied him. The Sub-inspector said that statement was not true. A conversation was going on between two men as to who should claim a certain bottle of whisky, 1 and while the controversy was raging the csonstablo said ho would shout, and he was then served. Mr Hay said ho understood that tho constable had to beg of Mrs Moir three or four times before ho was supplied. The Sub-inspector said one redeeming feature about the woman was that she was truthful. Constable Pardy would bear him out as tg tbia.

Tho Magistrate said ho purposed to inflict a substantial penalty. Considering tho woman'H position, liowovar, ho thought tho law would bo eufKciontly vindicated by imposing a penalty of £50 and court costs (7s) on each of tho three informations; 48 hours being allowed in which to pay. CHARGE AGAINST WILLIAM MOIR. William Moir was then charged with aiding and abetting in tho illegal salo of liquor. Mr Hay, on his behalf, pleaded guilty, and submitted that as tho female defendant had been heavily fined s. small penalty would suffice in the case of tho husband. Ho was really an imbccile. Tho Sub-inspector: Yos, ,as tho result of soaking in whisky. Mr liny: Possibly so; and that is one reason why the family should get out of tho business. Ho submitted that tho man could scarcely be Baid to be privy to his wife's misdeeds. j In answer to tho bench, Mr Hay said 'tho house, which was on an education leasehold, really belonged to tho wife. His Worship siiid that, having regard to tho defendant's ago and mental ( mdition, and tho fact that the wifo was tho real o(Tender, ho would convict and inflict a small fine. Defendant would be fined £10, with costs (7s); 48 hours being granted in which to pay.

An order was made for the confiscation of 'the liquor seized.