EHRENFRIED V. GLEESON.

Auckland Star, Volume XXI, Issue 164, 14 July 1890, Page 4

EHRENFRIED V. GLEESON.

DEFENDANT'S CASE CONTINUED. The case of Ehrenfried v. Gleeson was continued all Saturday afternoon, and was then adjourned till ten o'clock thle morning, when evidence was taken before His Honor Mr Justice Conolly. On Saturday afternoon Messrs W. Duncan, traveller for Hancock and Co., Edmunds, and A. Taylormanager for Brown and Campbell—were examined as to the price of beer for the defence. „ , This morning Mr A. Heather was called and examined by Mr Tole. Ho spoke as to the interview at Mr Cotter's office shortly before the previous case was to have been tried. He had tried to bring Messrs Ehrenfried and Gleeson together. He did bring them together, and agreed on a baeis of settlement, iuet outside Mr Cotter's office. Though MrGleeson practicallyagreed to the terms of agreement, yet he said he was being taken into the enemies' camp, and must not be committed. Mr Heather aleo gave evidence as to certain brands of cigara and spirits. He was cross-examined at some length by Mr Cooper on the terms of the agreement settled between the. parties at the meeting outside Mr Cotter's office. He was also re-examined by Mr Tola on the same points. To His Honor Mr Heather explained that ho thought both Messrs Gleeaon and Ehrenfried understood the interview was without prejudice, because he had mentioned it to them during the morning, and had said to both that the meeting was to be without prejudice. After the evidence of Mr Heather was concluded, the further hearing of the case was adjourned till afber bankruptcy sittings. The case was resumed this afternoon, when Alfred J. Tapper, liceneee of the Hobson Hotel, deposed to the price he paid Hancock and Co. for beer. The price was reduced to him about September last year. Arthur R. Hardy, licensee of the Kings Arms Hotel, deposed that he paid Hancock and Co. £4 per hogshead for hie beer. He had been paying that price for the last twelve months. Andrew Fernandez (Britomarfc Hotel)wae also examined. Witness was not bound in any way, and always took in what; beor he liked. For the last three years be paid from £5 downwards for his beer. The £5 wae paid for Joel's XXXX; for XXX ho paid from £4 10s to £3 10s. He pot the £3 10a beer some 12 months a&°- *°* Watson and Murray's lie paid £4 6s 6d and got 20 per cent, discount. During the last 12 months he paid £3 15s neb and £3 12a 6d net. During the last two or three months he paid £4 6s 6d to Ehrenfiied, with 10 per cent. off. Arthur Henry Taylor deposed that the price of Brown and Campbell's beor was £4 nott, and that that had been the price since 1886. There were some concessions to Mr Gleeaon and two others. He considered £4 a fair price per hhd for beer during the last four years. Two beers were made by Brown and Campbell. They did not charge £4 6s 6d when they sold hhds. of beer. Jf they sold hhds. they charged £4; but if they sold lees quantities, as barrels, they charged £4 6s 6d. • ■■-