police v. ah sing— sly grog selling,

[nzbc]

September 23. police v. ah sing— sly grog selling, Mr Perkins appeared for accused, and pleaded not guilty. Constable Barry opened the proceedings, stating that the case was for breach of section 6 of Licensing; Act, 1873, and that particulars would come out in evidence. He called Hot King, when Mr Perkins raised the question how the witness elected to he sworn. The reply waß, on the Bible," and the ceremony was gone through. Witness said. lam a Chinese interpreter residing at Ahaura. I know the defendant Ah Sing. He keeps a boarding-house at Ahaura. Was at his house on the night of Saturday the 10th mat. between 10 and 11p.m. Ah Sing supplied ni9 with brandy. I paid him Is. It was in a basin. Nothing was mixed with it. Ah Sing told me lie would take my life for giving iaforma» tion. I purchased no more drink. Saw 0 one else do so. Others got drink. Mr Perkins objected to him of examination. This was the case for the proseoution. Cross-examined The meaning of my being sworn on the Bible means that I should tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God. Ido not know what is in the Bible. I do not know the harm. If 1 told a lie great harm woull happen. I aui doing nothing. Had no occupation for two or three months. I never went to Ah Sing for opium. I got Borne and paid for it. Ib was no 4 because he refused me opium that I informed. Ah Huet was with me. There were three of us. Defendant keeps a cook ahop. I am sure 1 had no supper there. I gave him Is. Others were in the room when i 1 gave him the shilling. The brandy was I in a basin. I had not the first drink. It was divided I drank it out of my own basin. I left after that. Mr Perkins questioned whether a case had been made out, pointing out that the oath was not that of a credible witness, The Court held that sufficient evidence had been given for to call for a defence, and that it fell upon accused to prove negatives. As long as informant says the oath is binding on his conscience no further objections can be entertained. Mr Perkins held that the information had been laid from animus, because defendant did not give him informer opium. There was a shadow of truth in the informer's story, which made it all the more difficult to disprove. The police visited the house, searched it closely, and found no spirits. The defendant sold the supper consisting of rice, lobsters, and eggs to the informer and others, and he would call evidence entirely disproving the informers main charge. Ah Ohee was sworn to interpret Chinese into English and the reverse. Ah Sing, as well as the last Chinaman, were sworn by the blowing out of a match the match being lit by the interpreter handed by him to witness, who held it in a line with his mouth and ears, looking intently ah the flame uniil the cersmony of administering was over, I when he quickly blew out the light, a 3 wave of the hnnd following. Defendant i then statad I am a boarding-house i keeper at Abaura. Remember the night s of the 30th instant. I know Hoo King. He came to my house on that date, i asking if I would trust him some opium. t I would not trust him. King came to J supper on that date with E. Chang and i Ah Poo. They came to my house for an 3 opium 1 smoke and supper. They paid one and sixpence each, being the regular i price. I produce Chinese writing. It reads ''One Bupper, one and sixpence. 7 Terms cash. No trust." Hoo King gave 5 me half-acrown. I gave him Is change. I never sold Hoo King brandy. I never sold brandy. I have brandy at times i when friends came in. I gave the i brandy in this basin. No person paid me for brandy. >The police visited my house that night. The house was searched. No brandy was found. Cross- examined I will swear that the Chinese writing reads one supper for one and sixpence. There were five of us in the house on that date. Three men had supper, Two went to bed. Four men had supper. Pour men had brandy. About, two sthingysful. Two sthingysful s each man. No charge for brandy, I took no money for brandy. I never said I had brandy in the hcuseu'i had i vinegar, I By the Court: If Chinese come in tired, wet, and huugry from l a r distance I give them a little brandy. Hoo King i told me he came from a distance that i day. E. Pod being similarly sworn. -I was i in Ah Sing's house on the 10th. Saw i the informer there. We came in for snpper. E. Chong had supper. King paid half a crown to Ah Sing. He. got is change. No person bought brandy. Informer did not pay for brandy, 1 had brandy! Ah Sing gave it me. I paid for supper, but for no brandy. Cross-examined I have 'a second name. I know Ah Sing, I come from the same province in China. Cannot read Chinese. I am certain Hoo King got Is back from Ah Sing; „Am certain Hoo King: did not give the Is to Ah Sing. I had supper and brandy. About tw.o sthingysfull. i Some Chinese drink. Some do not. Ye Chung examined I had supper with Kin», and the last witness on Saturday the 30th. Saw King pay half: a-crown for supper. Saw him "get the change^ Never saw Sing qell brandy. |j King did not buy brandy that night. I had brandy from Sing. I did hot pay for it. Cross-examined Saw King pay half-a- crown. He got Is change. I have not spoken to other witnesses about thia case. I have b3en boarding with Chum Lung. I have been at Sing's house since the summons was .served. I bought opium there. By the Court I had often supper at Sing's previous to this. I never had brandy from Sing I previously. K p j The Interpreter being recalled translated the Chinese characters on paper produced as follows: One supper, one and sixpence. All cash. No trust. Signed Sing, atore, which was confirmed by interpreter for ths police. Constable Barry replied upon the evidence, admitting the extreme difficulty of obtaining a conviction in cases of this description. The Court summed up tho evidence, and addressing tho defendant pointed out the henioußnewj of the offence! and the dangerous practice he was following i
of giving suppers, while selling brandy. The case looked very suspicious there, was very little moral doubt as commission of the offence charged still, as a doubt did exist in the mind of the Court, the accused got the benefit of it, and he would be discharged. Grey River Argus, Volume XXIV, Issue 4081, 28 September 1881, Page 2 paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=GRA18810928.2.11.1&srpos=26&e=-------100--1----0Ah+long+Ahaura--