Rex v Jackelson

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Innes CJ, Juta JA and JER De Villiers AJA
• Judgment Date: 20 June 1920
• Hearing Date: 15 June 1920
• Court: Appellate Division

Juta, J.A.:

Accused is the lessee, on a monthly tenancy, of a certain block on which is situated his house and yard and which is separated by a fence with a gate in it from an adjoining yard, bounded by a corrugated fence and 25 rooms. The greater portion of the block consists of this yard. On the 30th of November,

Juta, J.A.

1919, the police raided this yard and arrested about forty natives for being in possession of "skokian" and Kafir beer. This was found buried in the ground in casks. The accused came into this yard while the raid was in progress, when the police found 400 gallons of beer; and he had frequently been told by the police that the amount of liquor on the premises was a disgrace. There is no store or retail store on the accused's premises. Between the 29th of December, 1919, and the 6th of January, 1920, a produce merchant supplied accused with 12,500 lbs of sugar. Skokian is made from sugar.

On the 8th of January last the police again raided the yard. of the 25 rooms only 3 were occupied by families, the remaining 22 having no beds or bedding, only forms round the walls. The families were in occupation by virtue of a lease with accused. Some natives had lived there for a long time; three for nine months, some for a month or two. When the raid took place some 50 to 60 natives were in the yard; some were digging said some were drinking. The police found buried in this yard, in 27 holes (some 9 to 12 feet from the surface but on an average 3 feet from the surface), 96 fifty-four gallon casks, 1 eighty gallon cask, and 17 twenty gallon drums, all containing Skokian and Kafir beer, some in a fermenting state. From an inspection of the yard, the magistrate who tried the case, found that it was impossible for the liquor to have been brewed without the accused's knowledge. He was charged with contravening sec. 48 of Ordinance 32 (Transvaal) of 1902 read with Act 31 of 1917, sec. 139, sub-sec. 2, by aiding certain natives to be in possession of intoxicating liquor by allowing them to conceal intoxicating liquor on his premises, and convicted. He appealed to the Provincial Division and the conviction was confirmed. He now applies for leave to appeal to this Court.

The grounds taken are:-

That inasmuch as the Ordinance 32, sec. 48, makes it an offence for a coloured person to be in possession of intoxicating liquor, a white person cannot be a socius criminis, and that the Act of 1917 does not apply...