Sly grog

Sly grog was a term covering illegal alcohol, that is sold without a victualler's license. These could be normal quality products, or in some cases these were highly suspect concoctions made in back yard operations. Publicans who had to pay for their licenses, meet requirements for buildings and services, and be subject to inspections, were quite hostile towards sly grog sellers who operated outside the law.

The Ballarat Star in November 1879 published an opinion piece on sly grog in Ballarat, in reference to the newly reformed Ballarat Licensed Victuallers' Association:

One of the chronic grievances of the trade has been and is the prevalence of "sly-grog selling," and the report naturally refers to that subject. It is well known that some shanties exist in this town where the law is systematically broken, and where the illicit trade has been persisted in after repeated fines. How this is we are at a loss to understand, unless it be that the law is not adequately repressive, or that the police and paid, inspectors are remiss in their duties. But we see that the report expresses the satisfaction of the association at the “indefatigable exertions" of Messrs Kilfedder and Shepherd, so that they must at any rate be held to have performed their duty well. Yet sly-grog selling exists, and in at least one instance it flourishes with midnight and Sunday revels almost in front of a licensed house whose owners have to pay a heavy license, and at the same time know that the law is being evaded by the vendors of sly-grog. One step taken by the association will, however, most likely help to make the shanty less easy to support, the brewers having “all pledged themselves not to supply anyone with ale or beer who was not licensed to sell the same." This we take to be only partially the fact, as it is not to be presumed that private houses are, altogether debarred from supplies of beer from the brewer. Indeed, as a matter of fact we know it is not the case, though it is doubtless, true that the brewers have, as indeed they ought, agreed not to supply suspicious characters. But there is one thing yet for the association to do in this, relation, and one equally or even more to the purpose than the appeal to the brewers. As the very name of the grievance implies, it is sly-grog and not sly-beer that is the main source of attraction at the shanties complained of, and we take it that the association has not half performed its functions until it has obtained from the whole sale vendors of spirits a similar pledge to that obtained from the brewers. In this effort the teetotallers might well enough second the exertions of the Licensed Victuallers’ Association, for it is notorious that most of the sly grog shanties are nests of immorality, and crime of the worst description. Even the worst kept licensed house is in some sort under, the eye of the public, and its occupier more or less under the direct control of the authorities; but the sly-grog shanty is generally the resort of loose characters without the restraining influence of open doors, police inspection, and periodical application for license.

In January 1872, a group of publicans in Learmonth were charged with sly grog selling. The local council had refused to allow a reduced license fee, and they took a chance of operating without a license:

At the Learmonth Police-court, on Monday, convictions were obtained against sundry vendors of sly grog. With one or two exceptions the defendants were until the beginning of the present year holding publican’s license. The shire council, declining to recommend the extension of a £10 license to this district, these unfortunates tried he experiment of selling without any permission, and have had to pay somewhat dearly in consequence. In two cases, one especially, the evidence was very contradictory. To support the prosecution, and establish proof of the various sales, samples of beer and spirits sold to the informer, were produced in court. A wag suggested that in order to confirm the decision of the bench, such samples should have been handed round in court, so that the public might rest satisfied that the contents of the bottles were really the genuine elixirs. Mr Finlayson conducted the prosecution on behalf of Mr Ross, revenue officer of Ballaratshire.

In March 1872 the Creswickshire Council passed a motion opposing the granting of colonial wine licenses, arguing that there were promoting the sale of sly grog:

The Creswickshire Council is opposed to the granting of colonial wine licenses within its territory, being of opinion that the license is merely used as ii cover for grog-selling. In reply to two applications for colonial wine licenses made at the last meeting, the council decided that the solicitor of the council should oppose the granting thereof by the Creswick licensing bench.

Sly grog sellers

The sly grog businesses were often in shanties, or houses, and were not named. In many of the newspaper reports, the name of the person charged is also not given.

List

• Click here for the names of sly grog sellers