THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXII, Issue 12395, 20 February 1908, Page 6

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20.

On the C£iirt resuming this morning his Honor "heard the

APPEAL of Robert Sullings against the conviction by Mr R. L. Stanford, S.M., in the charge brought against him by Constable Carey, of keeping liquor for sale within a proclaimed, native no-license area, the fine inflicted being .£25 and' l costs .£1 17s. , Mr Wilford appeared, for the appellant and Mr Marshall, the Crown Prosecutor, for the police. The grounds of appeal on which the appellant relied were that, of the three bottles of whisky found on the defendant's (Sullings) premises, two were riot his property, and were not kept by him, and that it was proved by the defendant that, the liquor found was kept for the use "of defendant and his household, and not for sale.

Mr Marshall called Constable Carey, who stated' that prior to visiting the accused's home at night, on the 21st November, he had in the afternoon seen drunken men coming from the direction of the accused's, about half a mile from the house.

His Honor said half a mile was too distant 'to be relevant in the charge.

Witness, continuing, 6aid that on searching the house at nijht two of the men were under the influe»ce of drink. Told Sullings he had/ & warrant to search for liquor. Sullings said, -"-Search away! You won't find anything." Searched a portmanteau, but found .' nothing, and then turned to a steel trunk. Asked for the owner of the box, but no one replied. Sullings eventually turned to a man named Randal for the key, but Randal said he had not got it. Then told Snllings that if the key, was not forthcoming the box would be broken open. Constable Thomson burst the lid open, and inside were found two- bottles. Several empty bottles and a full one were found under the bed, the brand being the same as the other two. Sullings said he did not know the owner of the box, but that it was left b,y a coach a week previous. The empty bottles appeared to-jhaye just been emptied. ; : 91." To Mr i Wilford — The two men were able to walk away. There was no drinking going on at the time witness visited the house. Would swear ithe bottles had been opened within a week!. Would swear positively that the coachdsfver had stated that he did not leave the-'box, or a similar box. There wore sonU. theatrical dodgers in the box, unworn,^birts, etc. Sullings had ; offered his keys> J^a^l none of them would open the box. Jitl Constable Thomsqi}, wnc" accompanied the previous witness. ,durifi<j the search, corroborated the lattcr',s evidence. This concluded the case for the Crown, and for the defence Mr Wilford called Robert Sullings, who said that no one had got any liquor, during the day or evening, 'and none of "jhe men in the room at night had had liquor from witness. The only, drink witness had" of his- own was a bottle of whisky "under the mattreee. There wereTjut three r) empty- bottles in the place, and these had, been opened seven Or eight days previously. Only bought four bottles altogether, all coming through the post. Had not told th© .constable they would find nothing. The tin box was left several days before the police raid, and was not witness's property. The only liquor in, witness's possession was the one bottle in the bed., which was for his own use.

To Mr Marshall — Was aware that it was a regulation of the Post Office that liquor could not be sent through the post. Did not tell the constables that the whisky wa's in the bed, because he did not think it necessary. No on);, had yet called for the box. Did not ask Randal for any keys for the box.

This concluded the case, and Mr Wilford; follpwed by Mr Marshall, addressed his Honor.

His Honor reserved hils decision till later in the sitting, in ouder t6 have time to review the evidence, and look up authorities.