LEGAL & MAGISTERIAL NOTEs

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XI, Issue 511, 4 October 1900, Page 19

LEGAL & MAGISTERIAL NOTEs

At the Christchurch Police Court last week Herbert William Piper, of the Gladstone Hotel, was charged with selling beer after eleven o’clock at night. The police gave evidence to the effect that a man named James Crowley had been found coming from the hotel after hours with two bottles of beer in a kit. James Crowley admitted going into the hotel after hours, but denied getting anything. The beer he had bought earlier in the evening. The Magistrate said that he could not convict on the evidence, and dismissed the case.

What will the United Kingdom Alliance say, I wonder, to port and sherry being included amongst “ teetotal stuff ” ? When the tenant of a tied house at Stockport applied to the Licensing Sessions for a renewal of his license, the question arose whether he was bound to take wine as well as beer and stout from one firm. The solicitor for the applicant replied in the negative, adding, “ Few brewers tie for wine.” The Mayor: I thought some tied for that and everything else. The solicitor replied that some did.. He was once asked in that court if the brewers in a certain case did not tie for sand to. put on the floors. James Jarvis, a witness in support of the application, said that all his family except himself were teetotalers, and they attended this place, one being a treasurer of a football dub held there. It was desirable that they 'should be able to get teetotal stuff. Mr Coppock: Would you consider port and sherry teetotal stuff? Witness: Yes. (Laughter.) The license was granted, the Mayor adding, ‘ ‘ on the distinct understanding that it is to be free to the tenant.” The Clerk; No wine tie.

At the Auckland Police Court, before Mr H. W. .Brabant, S M., Olive Catherine Lock appeared rn answer to four charges of having on September 9 th, sold liquor, to wit, beer, to Alex. A. Mitchell and Walter Williams, she not being a person duly licensed to sell such liquor. SubInspector Wilson conducted the prosecution, and Mr J.. O’Meagher appeared for the defendant. It was agreed to take the four charges together. ’ Constable A. A. Mitchell said he visited Mrs Lock’s house, Cypress Cottage, Howe-street, on the evening of Sunday, September 9 th. He was in plain clothes, and was accompanied by a man named Walter'‘Williams. They arrived at the house about a-quarter to ten. Mrs Lock asked them into the sitting-room, and after waiting there for a few minutes they asked to be supplied with drinks. Mrs Lock thereupon went into an. adjoining room, and returned with a large bottle of Nathan’s Dunedin Beer. They drank the contents of this bottle, and witness paid her 5s for it. Williams next ordered a bottle and paid 5s for this bottle also. Two bottles more were ordered before they left, and paid for at the same rate. The contents of the last two were not all consumed, and the bottles were taken away with part of their contents. and sealed at the police station. He produced these bottles. Crossexamined: He was sent to the house by Sergeant Forbes to. see if he could get a conviction. Mr O’Meagher • Tn procure the commission Of an offence ? Witness assented to this, and said Williams knew what their object was, having been instructed by Sergeant Forbes. He was a police agent. Witness was cross-examined as to certain conversation which took,place between “Williams and Mrs Lock, but his recollection did not serve him. Neither he nor Williams pretended to be drunk. Neither of them assaulted or attempted to assault the defendant or another woman, Mrs Quin tel, who was present. He did not put his arm around Mrs Quintet’s waist. He did not force her into a bedroom. He could not swear whether Williams said, ‘ ‘ I swear by God we are not detectives.” Williams in his examination in chief made a statement similar to the constable’s Cross-examined; He went deliberately to get a conviction against Mrs Lock. He got paid by results. He had bean employed by the police since June last. He had got 23 conviction for sly grog-selling in the King Country. Mr O’Meagher: Don’t you consider it rather mean behaviour ? Yes. Don’t you feel ashamed ? What’s the use of feeling ashamed after it’s done. In opening the case for the defence, Mr- O’Meagher freely criticised the methods employed by the police in the case. He then called defendant. After taking the evidence of the defendant the charges of sly grog-selling were adjourned. Subsequently by private prosecution Constable Mitchell and the informer Williams were charged with rape. These charges, after much contradictory evidence was taken, were dismissed. The total fines in the sly grog-selling cases in the King Country amounted to £397 ss. In all, thirty-one informations were laid, and nineteen convictions recorded. The case against Martin Lee for selling whisky was dismissed. Hauporoa, a native now laid up in the Waikato Hospital, has 'several charges to answer. Mr S warbrick, who appeared for the defence, applied for a month’s adjournment, which was granted. The heaviest fine was that of Alexander Campbell, an old offender, living at Poro-o-tarao Tunnel, who for three charges of selling rum to Ryan and O’Connor was fined £l2l Bs, to be paid forthwith, or in default 12 months’ hard labour. There was no appearance of Campbell, who returned home by Thursday’s train, before his case was dealt with In the case William Thornton (second offence), three charges of selling liquor, he was fined £25 and £2 7s 9d costs, in default two months hard labour. Defendant paid £5 forthwith and was given to Ist December to pay the balance In the case of Wm. Noble (three informations) he was convicted and fined £25 and costs £7 7s 6d, in default two months’ hard labour. Defendant stated that he had not the money, as he had just bought a business in Te Kuiti. The police were satisfied that he would

not “do a get,*’ and His Worship allowed two months’ to pay the fine. In the Information against a man named O’Connor (no relation to the informant), His Worship said he would adjourn the case until next Court day, in order that the police may obtain a copy of the man’s time sheet from the Inspector of Works at Te Kuiti. The Magistrate intimated to the defendants that he would leave with the police all the warrants of commitment duly signed to be executed immediately the time allowed wherein to pay the fines had elapsed and default made.

Details of sly grog cases are clipped from the Waikato Times. . Ngamiri Hauparoa, a native, was charged with selling whisky to David Emery, a half-caste, at Otorohanga, on August 16th. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable Lowry prosecuted, and Mr A. Swarbriek appeared for the defendant. David Emery deposed that on the night of August 16th he met Constable Lowry in Otorohanga. .The constable searched him, and afterwards gave him 13s. He went into defendant’s house and asked for her husband, who was not at home. He then asked if she would give him a drink, and she said yes. He then went into a bedroom, and was supplied with two whiskies, the liquor being got from under the bed, for which he paid Is. He then came out of the store, and the constable searched him again, and found 12s on him. He knew it was the intention of the police to obtain a conviction. The whisky was obtained from under the bed. There was a door at the back of the store Which led into the bedroom. Constable Lowry said he searched Emery before he went into the defendant’s house, and he had no money. He supplied him with 13s, and Emery then went into the house, and after a while he came out and only had 12s. Mr S warbrick, for the defence, stated that an informer ought to have his evidence corroborated. His Worship said it was not necessary. Defendant deposed that on the night of August 16th Emery came to her house, and was let in by the back door. She did not sell him any whisky She did not understand that kind of thing. Cross-examined by Constable Lowry witness stated there had been a good deal of drinking going on on the premises. She slept in the room, but did not know there was any whisky under the bed. If there had been it would have made a lump in the bed. Her husband admitted Emery. Constable Lowry said he could see the door in question, and saw the woman open the door on both occasions. His Worship, Mr Northcroft, said there was a doubt in the case. The defendant had given her evidence very clearly and straightforward, and either the witnesses for the prosecution were mistaken or defendant was deliberately lying. He would dismiss the case. Two other natives, named Mahuri and Ngatai, were charged with selling liquor without a license at Kawakawa. Defendants both pleaded guilty, and were each fined £l5 and £4 19s 3d costs. Constable Hyde represented the pslice.