Waterhouse v R [1911] HCA 20

228, HIGH COURT _ [19H

H.C. or A. the fact is not ancillary to the prevention of the crime. So con- 1911. strued, the section is clearly not wltra vires. 'The same evidence — :

which went to show that the goods had been imported showed

Hitt ce also that when they came into the possession of the appellant he

Dowonor. 4 had knowledge of the fact. The appeal must therefore be dis- Griffith C.J. *, missed. Barton J. I am of the same opinion. O'Connor J. I agree. Appeal dismissed. Solicitor, for appellant, B. A. McBride. Solicitor, for respondent, Crown Solicitor for the Common- wealth. C.E. W. ae Pied te nate oy (HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.] WATERHOUSE . - : - # . APPELLANT; DEFENDANT, AND THE KING . s " ' ' 5 J . RESPONDENT.

INFORMANT.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

H.C. or A. NEW SOUTH WALES. 1911.

S— Criminal law—Larceny—Opium—Possession prohibited—Police Offences (Amend- MELBOURNE, —— ment) Act 1908 (N.S. W.) (No. 12 of 1908), sécs. 19, 20.

June 1. Sec, 19 (a) of the Police Ofences (Amendment) Act 1908 provides thal

Grimith 0.3., "No person shall (a) unless the holder of a certificate to deal in poisons, oConnor, issued under the provisions of the Poisons Act 1902, or any Act amending the jenacs an

Higgins JJ. same, sell, or haye in his possession, opium." Sec. 20 provides that—

13 C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. 229 "(1). . . Ifopium is found . ~, , in the possession of any person, H. C. oF A. the constable may demand the production of the said certificate . . . from 191l, the person in whose possession the opium is found, and if such certificate is — not produced, may forthwith seize the opium, and arrest any person present © WATER- who he has reasonable ground to suspect is contravening the provisions of the "OVS" last preceding section and take him before a stipendiary or police magistrate, 'Tu Kina.