THE ILLICIT STILL CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7505, 12 September 1902, Page 2

THE ILLICIT STILL CASE.

ACCUSED BEFORE THE COURT. v A SUBSTANTIAL FINE. At the Magistrate's Court this morning, before Mr R. Beetbwn, 8.11, J»m« Edward M'Grath was charged that, on Sept. 8, *t 138, Worcester Street; Linwood, be was found in possession of an. illicit still and fifty quart bottles of wnisfcy. Mr Stringer appeared" for the piosecution, and Mr Russell for the defence. In reply to the usual, caution the •*» cused elected to be dealt with summarily, and pleaded gu|lty. Mr Stringer stated that tße charge w*r laid under Section- 111 of the Distillation Act, which provided that any persen^ found in possession of a still or of illegally nude whisky should be fined not less than £50, and not more than £500. v The circum•tances were very simple. The aecoaec] came to the coloay only a- few months ago, and nothing was ' known of him. ' He was found with a complete apparatus for distillation in, his possession. The.re. were also four empty sugar bags and one JKetfy empty on the premises, and a< quantity- of yeast, materials formating whisky- T&fre were only three people an the ihouse, tha accused, his wife, tad a map named Sheridan, so the amount of .sugar presumably used by them was abnormally large- ' The distilling apparatus was complete, though it had taken some time to find some part* of it. The whisky discovered in the fifty quart bottles had been analysed and found to contain alcohol such as would be produced from sugar and yeast. The amount of sugar apparently vatd would produce about tßirty-four gallons of spirit. The accused's action was very barefaced. Mr Beetham said that a question arose in regard to the fine and its enforcement. He could make, an alternative penalty. Mr Stringer said that Section 164 provided twelve months' imprisonment in default of payment of a fine, but under the Justices of the Peace Act the alternative was limited to .three months. It -was quite clear that the Act did 1 not allow a fine with the alternative of unpriaonr ment. '.V In reply to Mr Beetham, Mr Strings* said -that nothing was known of the accused. Mr Russell said that in so clear a case he could not try to raise a defence, but ceujd fQßty plead for, the lightest posiible penalty. The aiccused had lived for some years in Australia. He was an expert toy-maker, by trade, and for some year* past had been acting as an accountant and! doing clerical work. Some four or 'live months ago' a man named Sheridan got Mm to do some clerical work in Sydney. Their acquaintance gradually ripened, and in time , Sheridan told him that he had been engaged in distilling whisky and wine. Then the accused cam© to .Christchurch, hoping to start a toy factory, and Sheridan came with him. After they had been jbere at snort time, Sheridan suggested that they should 1 begin to niake wine out of raisins and currants. He said that this was not illegal, and something could be made oat of it. Sheridan got the} accused to procure some fittings, and suggested that the copper would-be useful fop distilling. They began work, and made the spirit found. Wfcen Mrs M'Grath saw it, she thought it was not wine, and hinted to her husband that they Were breaking the law. M'Qrath then refused to- have anything more to do with it, and Sheridan, left the house. The liquor was stored in a- cupboard, not a drop being sold, and M'Qrath proceeded to pull the; still to pieces. Ha was doing this when the Collector of Customs arrived, and asked if he had not fortynine bottles of whisky in a clipboard. He had a wife, but no children), and bad hither* to borne an excellent character. His means were almost nothing, fop ij» had 1 dope no work here, and had only about £40 in hand. He asked that he should fee fined the minimum amount, and allowed to pay into Court what he had, being placed on probation until the rest was paid. He could get work at once. . Mr Stringer said that they had no mtans of checking the statements made by M» Russell, and they were inconsistent * with what the accused told Mr MUls when discovered. He had saM that he^came to the colony to buy stock. Various part* of the apparatus were carefully concealed in ki* house, and were only discovered after diligent search. The accused said he wat ojtfy jnaking some experiments, and would. let them know more about them later on. H* also told Mr Mills that the hydrometer he u«d was a syringe. <In regard to Sh^f^ against whom no evidence would be offered, he was raitiher a disreputable old JB*«, Ml undesirable immigrant, and had been smuggled into the colony as M'Giai&'s father. M'Grath told Mr Mills that he -had hjadi £700 to purchase stock with, out «*4 OostJ most of it. • „. ' . Mr ßeetham said there could 1 be noobjee* tion to his taking' the case agato* Sheridsa before sentencing M'Graiih. Mr Stringer replied" that toe yrorM oSem no evidence against' Sheridan. M'Grath! had told Mr Mills that tihe «W wm wo* simply a. .giuest in the house. Mr Beetham »'" Your not prpoeedin«

against Sheridan' gives some colour to Mr Russell's statements." Mr Russell saidi that he would accept Mr Stringer's version of the story. No doubt *ihe»)a.n mid anything tibat oame into bis head wh«n he found himself cornered. Mr Beetham said that the offenoe seemed too serious for the minimum penalty. He would fine the accused £100. He asked whether *ay iecurity could be given. Mr Russell replied that tfaere was not the ■iljg&test chance of it. Mr Beetham;: " I musk <*» "aj " he caoaot pay the fir», tie alternative will be three months' imprisonment." Tj> the accused : " H*ve you any goods on which this fine can be levied,?" Th« accused : " No. No goods at all." A CHARGE WITHDRAWN. The charge against Joto Sheridan, of flaring been oßnceraed in, the making of whisky was then readMr Stringer said that he did mot wish to proceed with it, «a*d' the (man wa* therefore dieohajged. '.