SALE OF HASHISH

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 713, 12 July 1929, Page 1

SALE OF HASHISH

alleged supply to SOUTH SEA ISLANDS CENSURE BY MAGISTRATE

Suggestions that defendant was one of those responsible for the supply of the drug to the South Sea Islands were made in the Police Court this morning, when Harold Stanley Lodder was fined £5 for supplying an unlicensed

person with Indian hemp, or, as it is more usually known, hashish. Lodder, who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr. F. W. Schramm, and Mr. V. N. Hubble appeared for the Health Department. Mr. Hubble said that the prosecution was brought under regulation cumber eight, gazetted in September, of the Dangerous Drugs Act. It was ihe first prosecution in Auckland and possibly in New Zealand under those regulations. Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M.: We don’t want any more. We know what a terrible thing it is. Counsel said that as a result of complaints about the drug finding its way to the Islands, an inspector had made investigations discovering that Lodder had bought a quantity from a firm of wholesale druggists in Auckland. ‘/We do not suggest that Lodder is responsible for all T he Indian hemp that goes to the Islands,’* continued counsel, “but a S ale of 11 ounces was made to him on November 1.” An inspector had interviewed Lodder, not at the Palmerston Pharmacy, where he had been employed at the time of the sale, but a t the Albert Pharmacy. Lodder was not a chemist under the pharmaceutical regulations, but was a business manager. There was no record of any sale of Indian hemp at the Palmerston Pharmacy. “SOLD LIKE HOT CAKES” Robert Grieve, late health inspector at Auckland, said that early in March of this year he had commenced his investigations into the hemp question. On going to the Palmerston Pharmacy after seeing the books of the wholesale firm, witness had found that Lodder was no longer employed there, and there was only one ounce of the drug in the shop. “It used to sell like hot cakes before the new regulations came into force,** added the inspector. Mr. Schramm: Yes it was used for mixing up corn cure, though I have not tried it myself. Continuing, the inspector said that he had interviewed Lodder at the Albert Pharmacy, where defendant had told him that he had given the drug, parcelled and unopened, to his J brother, who was leaving for Sydney. } Witness admitted to Mr. Schramm j that the new regulations on which the | charge was based had not been circu- j lated until October as far as he knew. According to Dr. T. J. Hughes, Medical Officer of Health in Auckland, Lodder did not hold a licence. The new regulations referred to had been distributed to all chemists and managers of pharmacies early in October. SOLD OVER COUNTER Mr. Schramm based his defence on Lodder’s not having been informed of the new regulations. “Under the old Poisons* Act no licence was required,’* continued counsel. “The Dangerous Drugs Act was inspired by ihe League of Nations in 1927, but the new regulations did not come into force until 1925.” Mr. Schramm held •that Lodder did not see a copy of the circular that had been sent out in October. It was not until December ihat he had become aware of the new regulations. He had sold the drug over the counter while he was working at the Palmerston Pharmacy and 'here was no entry in the poisons book because, until the new regulations came into force, it was not necessary. The Magistrate: We want to know what happened to the drug. There is a suggestion that it was sent to the islands. Put in the box by Mr. Schramm, Lodder supported his counsel's contention that the drug had been sold over the counter in the course of business. It was put up in small jars and sold in one lot for £4 2s Gd. He had told the inspector that he had given one lot to his brother, but that was a previous purchase made in the preceding June. The books in which to keep entries of sales had not been supplied by the Health Department until after Christmas. Lodder’s story of the sale was that a man had come in in the morning asking for one pound of the drug. “I had none in stock, but managed to get him 11 ounces by the afternoon when he called for it,’* continued defendant. “He was evidently from the crew of the Tofua. Had I known that I would not have given it to him.” “This is a very serious offence,” commented the magistrate. “So serious that in England these men are being fined £IOO or even gaoled. Lodder should have known of the restrictions on the sale of this drug and ignorance is no excuse.” The magistrate said that he was not going to impose the maximum penalty of £SO tins time. “The effects of this drug result in murder, suicide and goodness knows what,” continued Mr. Hunt, imposing a fine of £5 and costs. “I shall not make it £5 in future. A man ■"as sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment recently for this class of offence.” Mr. Hubble mentioned that had the charge been laid under the Act. instead of under the regulations, the Maximum penalty would have £SOO or 12 months’ imprisonm Hashish, also known under the name: of bhang, ganja and c haras, is made frojr Jhe dried leaves of Indian hemp, Cannaois Indica. It is prepared in -various jorms, for smoking, eating or drinking b «t in its edible form it is a dark green sticky substance with a barely perceptible taste. Its effects produce first a mild, pleasurable sense of intoxication and the acidic' feels cheerful and laughs on the smallesi Pretext. hater it causes a nervous conation in which the subject may got into i •u of homicidal mania without warning ln time the brain of a confirmed addic !° the drug may fail completely and hi: health will be seriously affected. It ha: keen said that hashish is “Rope at botl •-nds— a. hempen drink, a murder, and ; hempen cord.”