CO129-504-15 Various ordinances 4-4-1927 - 29-11-1927 — Page 26

26

It makes it clear that upon a charge of

possession of intoxicating liquors which

were imported, manufactured or prepared

contrary to the provisions of the Ordi –

nance the accused can avoid liability

by proving that he had good and suffi-

-cient reason to believe that the li-

-quors in question were lawfully im-

-ported, manufactured or prepared.

4. With regard to the throwing of the onus on the accused,

and with regard to the nature of that burden, it may be re-

-marked as follows :

(a) It is peculiarly difficult for the pro-

-secution to prove in any case that

duty has not been paid.

(b) It should generally be easy for the

accused to discharge the crus. If

duty has been paid there should usually

be no difficulty in proving that fact,

but it is sufficient for him to prove

that he had good and sufficient reason

to believe that it had been paid.

(c) The reference to proof beyond reasonable

doubt is inserted in order to indicate

that,

1

a mere unsupported asser-

tion of payment of duty will not neces-

-arily discharge the onus. It is

obvicusly necessary to legislate for

possible dishonesty and perjury. Pay-

-ment of duty is a definite fact,

analogous to the possession of a defi

-nite