LIQUOR SELLING IN A NOLICENSE AREA.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVIII, Issue 1034, 30 December 1909, Page 21

LIQUOR SELLING IN A NOLICENSE AREA.

PROSECUTIONS AT WAIHI. HEAVY FINES INFLICTED’. At the Waihi Police Court on the 22nd inst., fines aggregating £560 were imposed on persons charged with selling liquor in a “No-License” area. Mr. S. Mays appeared for the prosecutions in each case. The following persons were charged:—Hilton Moon (two charges), Thos. McMasters, Joseph Tanner, Florence Bellamy Tanner, F. Woods, Herbert Quinlan, Wm. Quinlan, M. R. Manning, J. L. Reen (Waikino), Daniel Dunne (two charges). In addition to the charges of sly grog-selling the following persons .were charged /(with (keeping liquor for sale:—Walter T. Parsons, Thos. McMasters, Joseph Tanner, Florence B. Tanner, Fredk. Collins, Wm. Quinlan, Herbert Quinlan, J. L. Reen, and Daniel Dunne. Apart from the charges subsequently laid against M. Manning, F. Woods, and F. Collins, all the offences were said to have taken place on the 9th and 10th inst. The informations numbered 21 in all. The liquor in all the instances but one was alleged to have been sold to Constables B. Thompson and T. Jones, the remaining instances being to W. Harris. With the exception of Hilton Moon, who failed to put in an appearance, and F. Collins, who entered a plea of not guilty, the whole of the persons charged pleaded guilty to the offences charged. In his absence Moon was convicted, after the police had given evidence to the effect that they had procured liquor. F. Collins, the proprietor of the premises known as “The Three Kings,” contended that he had not- kept the liquor for sale, but after hearing the evidence for the prosecution the magistrate entered a conviction. In the course of his address Mr. Mays said that, with the exception of Woods and Manning, the persons accused had entered openly into the sly grog-selling business in defiance of the law, and with a full knowledge of the penalties that would follow in the event of a conviction. He asked the magistrate to inflict such fines as would check the evil of the illicit sale of liquor. Woods and Manning, however, had only been selling in a small way. In delivering judgment, the magistrate said that, apart from the cases referred to by counsel (Woods and Manning), the full penalty would be imposed for the illicit sale of liquor. Accused had gone into the business with their eyes open, and had undertaken the risk. The offence was no new thing in the country, and he could not treat it as a first offence. With regard to selling without a license, a fine of £5O would be imposed, with costs, in each case. For his second offence in respect to selling without a license, Dunne would be convicted and fined £lO. For keeping liquor for sale, Parsons and Dunne would be each fined £2O, with costs. McMasters would be fined' £2O for keeping liquor for sale, and £5O for selling. Joseph Tanner would be fined £5O

for selling and £2O for keeping liquor for sale. As Mrs. Tanner had acted as more of an agent than anything else, she would be fined £lO for selling, but no fine would be imposed for keeping liquor. In the. case of the. Quinlans, ..both would be fined £5O each for selling, and for keeping liquor the father would be fined £2O and the son £lO. Moon would be fined £5O for selling and on the second charge £lO. For keeping liquor for sale he would be fined £2O. In the case of Reen, he would be fined £5O for selling, and £2O for keeping liquor for sale. Woods, Collins, and Manning would be fined £25 each. The magistrate ordered the liquor to be confiscated. ■