BREACH OF POSTAL ACT

Hawera Star, Volume L, 13 May 1931, Page 9

BREACH OF POSTAL ACT

WHOLESALE FIRM CHARGED. FIRST CASE OF ITS KIND. (Bv Tc-lpgraph—Press Association.) * CHRISTCHURCH, May 13. In the Magistrate’s Court, Aulsebrooks and Company, Limited, were charged with having sent a letter for hire or reward otherwise than by post, 1 contrary to section 23 of the Post and Telegraph Act, 1928. Edwin Clark was charged with carrying a letter for hire or reward. The Crown Prosecutor said that the case, which was of great importance to the department, was the first of its kind in New Zealand and defendants were liable to a fine of £2O in respect of every letter delivered contrary to the Act. The case was briefly that v certain storekeeper dealt with several firms, including Aulsebrooks. and had been receiving from the defendant Clark commercial papers from the firm. Counsel pointed out that the Department had the monopoly of correspondence and any attempt to deliver papers otherwise was detrimental to the revenue of the country. Defendants would have to prove that no reward was paid of received for delivery )f its letters. If it was proved that Clark had performed his duties gratuitiously as a friend of the firm the ease would fail. Counsel for the defence said Ins •lients had employed Clark since 1911. He was a trusted servant of the firm and was employed for other purposes than the delivery of letters. Whatever had been done by Clark had been done to the. knowledge of the highest officer of tlio department. Clark was not “generally employed” in the wording of the Act. but only* by a section of the wholesale firms. The purport of the Act was to prevent contractors from setting up in opposition to the department.