THE Southaland Times. THURSDAY, 6th AUGUST, 1903. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, 6th AUGUST, 1903. THE SLY GROG CASES.

Southland Times, Issue 19117, 6 August 1903, Page 2

THE Southaland Times. THURSDAY, 6th AUGUST, 1903. Luc eo Non Uro. THURSDAY, 6th AUGUST, 1903. THE SLY GROG CASES.

The Stipendiary Magistrate has r-ot had long to wait for the first batch of the inevitable criminal prosecutions that result from the attempt to settle the liquor problem by sheer force of numbers/ Laws prohibiting the selling of liquor are, and alwuys will be, regarded by a considerable, if not a large section of tho community as aji unjustifiable attempt to coerce them into a course of conduct which should only be adopted voluntarily. That section will if.;ver look upon breaches of those laws as wrongful, but will seek to justify them upon the ground that for the majority to dictate in such a matter is a misuse of power, and will have recourse to every shift and artifice to set the law at nought. This is undoubtedly the experience of those who have travelled in the Chitha district, where notoriously liquor can be obtained without any trouble, provided that the applicant is known, J and it is probably not overstepping the limits of trith to say that those who want it obtain their liquor as regularly and with as little difficulty to-day as they did when licenses 1 were in existence. If the prohibitionists are satisfied that this perpetual daylight mutiny against the law and deliberate planning to circumvent it is a good thing for any community, they hold peculiar ideas on the ethics Of government. It is demoralising to a people to lay it under a law that excites to rebellion and under which public opinion shields lawlessness and condones, if it does not commend, perjury. It was inevitable, on the carrying of prohibition in Mataura, that charges involving tiie illegal sale of liquor should follow, and tho first batch of cases was that which occupied the magistrate last week. The decisions in those cawes, published in yesterday's issue, declares in plain language that a numJber of residents of Fortrose have not only broken the law deliberately, but that in order to "escape tho consequences they have told a story in the witness box that was at variance with the truth. Alluding to one transaction in the case against Humphries, the Magistrate said, "I entirely disbelieve the evidence of defendant and his four witnesses." In the case against Millard, McDonald, Springford and McEwan his Worship said, " I disbelieve their evidence." In fact the whole tenor of the decision shows that the magistrate put no reliance whatever on the assertions made by the witnesses for the defence. Although there was no evidence of the actual acts of sale, either of an order given or of money paid, the magistrate held that the circumstances pointed to a sale, and that the €vid.encp for the defence was not sufficiently worthy of credence to warrant him in rejecting thp inference from those circumstances, W.hije we have no desire to challenge the acewracy of his Worship's decisions, we cannot refrain from saying that judgments so destructive to the churacter of those convicted should be supported by stronger evidence than was before the Court in this instance. Against the characters of those who appeared to answer the charges nothing, so far as we aro aware, had been previously recorded. Thj&y were respectable and respected men ; ihese were the first cases from the Mataura electorate ; the house had not the reputation of a shebeen ; there were extenuating circumstances, and iji iegard to some of the charges at least there was reasonable room for doubt. But the Court set jalj £hese considerations aside and took the severest view and meted out heavy penajtj.es. Even assuming that there was no other course open to the magistrate but to convict, we believe the ends of justice would have been attained satisfactorily with less severity. With Mr McCarthy's declaration cf the course he intends to pursue in fit. lire cases of sly grog-celling we hav.e no fault to flnd. The view he takes is that the Legislature has given certain powers to the people ; the pyoplo have exercised tho powers, and the law must be maintained. To that reasoning no objection can be taken. It would be disastrous to infect the people with the. idea tha-t, because a law is bad, it is not bad to break it. The authority of the law must-* bo upheld, and whatever soundness there may be in the doctrine of " passive resistance " any argument for open revolt is entirely vicious. However, there is tho unfortunate aspect of the question that the sanction of the law in this matter is openly set at defiance by not a small number of people who are not backward in declaring their intention of disregarding the law and of assisting others tp evade it. We hear a great deal about I the Success of prohibition, but \ye (mention tb# success of a law winch I mates law-fcreafctog -&4 E«OTS &;.

popular art. Such a law. not only falls to prevent the sale of alcoholic ' liquorß, but to the evils of drunken- : ness it adds indujgent attitude to- 1 wards legal and moral wrong-doing ; that cannot but i have a deteriorating . , effect upon the people. <