South Taranaki News

Taranaki Daily News, 26 November 1926, Page 2

South Taranaki News

(From Our Own Reporter.)

Telephone No. 586.

P.O. Box 133.

SUPPLYING LIQUOR TO NATIVE. CHARGE AGAINST LICENSEE. DECISION IN XORMANBY’ CASE. At the Hawera Magistrate’s Court yesterday, Mr. J. S. Barton, S.M., gave reserved judgment against defendant in the ease in which the police proceeded against Gerald Vineent Peddie, licensee of the Normanby Hotel, on a charge of supplying liquor to a female native on September 24, 1926. Peddie was convicted and fined £5 and costs 7s. The judgment stated: —“The information is laid under section 44 of the Licensing Amendment Act, 1910, which reads, ‘Every person (whether a licensed person or not) is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £5O, who, in any part of New Zealand, supplies liquor to any female native? “The facts are simple. The defendant is licensee of an hotel. On September 24 last he was, at about 11 a.m., engaged in the bar of his hotel. At that hour a waitress in his employ was engaged in the dining room. A native woman entered the hotel, proceeded to the dining-room and, handing a ten shilling note to the waitress, asked for a flask of whisky to be procured for her. The waitress took the money from the Native woman and repeated to the defendant the Native woman’s order. She tendered the ten shilling note to the licensee and received from him the flask of whisky and some silver as change. She at once returned to the dining-room and handed the flask and the change to the Maori woman. EMPLOYEE AS AGENT. The licensee did not ask the waitress for whom the whisky Was, nor did she volunteer the information, but the defendant, in his evidence, deposed that he knew that the waitress was not buying the whisky for herself. “I am satisfied and I find it proved as a fact that the defendant did not know that the sale of the whisky was to a Native woman. Two questions arise and they are: Does the transaction comprise a supply of liquor to the 'Native woman by the defendant and does the absence of knowledge that an offence -was being committed, excuse the defendant? “Dealing with the first question, I find that the transaction was a sale, the sale being completed there and then by payment of the price and delivery of the goods to the purchaser. The sale was made by the defendant in person, using his employee as his agent to carry the money from the purchaser to him end to deliver the goods to the purchaser. I cannot see how, in these circumstances, it can be suggested that the defendant, the vendor, did not supply the goods to the purchaser. To sell an article and to complete the sale by delivery to the buyer seems to me to be one of the clearest and most natural examples of ‘supply.’ Ido not think, further, that it can be suggested that a tradesman, selling articles daily from his stock-in-trade, supplies those goods which he personally hands to buyers, but does not ‘supply’ those buyers who receive the goods at the hands of employees. “ “NEGLECTED HIS DUTY.” “I am of opinion that if an intending purchaser wrote to a tradesman saying, ‘Can you supply me with A.8.C.? If so, please post it to me,’ and the tradesman responded by posting the goods to the buyer, that tradesman has supplied the goods whether, in fact, ‘A.B.C.’ signified a hymn book or a flask of whisky. “I am of opinion that the word ‘supplies,’ in its natural and ordinary meaning, includes a sale completed by delivery and it has been judicially interpreted as including ‘gifts’ and ‘mere physical deliveries? 1 find, therefore, that the defendant did deliver liquor to a Native woman. “The second question Is, ‘ls the defendant excused by the faet that he did not know that the sale was to a Native woman?’ In my opinion the answer to that question is ‘No? The true intent, meaning and spirit of section 4(1 of the Licensing Aet, 1904, clearly lays it down that the enactment we are now considi ering sets out an absolute prohibition against supplies of liquor to Maori women. “As to the degree of culpability attaching to the defendant, he gave evidence to the effect that he asked no questions of his employee when, he handed the whisky to her for delivery to his customer although he knew that sales to Native women, to intoxicated persons, to minors and to prohibited persons, were unlawful. The present defendant has neglected his dear duty, and in my opinion he cannot be held blameless.” DEALINGS IN LAND. FAILURE OF FARMING VENTURES. A meeting of creditors in the bankrupt estate of Frederick Alfred Litchwark, of Meremere, farmer, was held at the office of the D.0.A., Mr. R. S. Sage, on Wednesday afternoon. There were present: Messrs. C. D. Arlidge (representing Dr. Thomson), H. Cressey (Farmers’ Co-op.), Burgess (Winks estate), H. Collier (Parkinson and Co.), Mr. F. C. Spratt (the Winks estate) and Miss Henderson (for Mr. L. A. Taylor, representing Mr. R. Davis). Bankrupt was represented by Mr. G. J. Bayley. Bankrupt’s statement showed that unsecured debts amounted to £7BO 16s lid, secured debts totalling £4430, less the estimated value of securities £5038, which left a surplus to contra of £5OB. The deficiency remaining was £lB2 16s lid. The secured creditors were: Winks Estate, Hawera, £3OOO (estimated value of security £3598), and the Govett Estate. New Plymouth, £1430 (estimated value of security £1430). The unsecured creditors were: Blair and Sellar, £1 18s 3d; Dr. Thomson, £5 os; Henry Sanson, £37 Ils; W. Bright, 15s; R. T. Bullock, £l2 17s <W; W. G. Strange, £1 19s; R. Hafinah and Co., £6 ISslOd; New Zealand Clothing Factory, £2 8s 4d; R. H. Leece and Co., £2l 16s; Loan and Mercantile Agency Co., Ltd., 12s; Hodder and Tolley, £8; Bennett and Sutton, £5 18s 7d; Newton King, Ltd., £32; W. A. Parkinson and Co., Ltd., £10; Winks Estate, £108; Farmers’ Co-op., £271 IBs 7d; R. Davis?

(Mere Mere), £9O; T. R. Surrey, £l2; F. N. Gardner, £6 10s; Aladdin Industries, £2 12s; Commissioner of Crown | Lands, New Plymouth, £135 15s; Patea Harbour Board, £6 6s. LOSS THROUGH SALE OF FARM. I Bankrupts written statement was as follows: “I have been farming in Mere Mere for the past six years. I paid £lB an acre for 300 acres, paying £1350 in equity and giving a mortgage for £4OOO. I spent about £3OO on the property in improvements, and subsequently sold the place, losing the lot and receiving nothing from the sale. Three years ago I leased a farm at a rental'of lOa’per acre. I have endeavoured, by milking on rough sheep country, to make good, but notwithstanding the fact that I had two boys helping me, it has been imoossible, on account of losses of stock) to make any headway. The losses every year on an average have been £l5O and last year I lost over £3OO worth of stock on account of deaths and disease. About six months ago I arranged with the owner of the farm to purchase it, and as my lease was expiring, this was agreed to. “Expecting to be out of a farm about 3J years ago, I purchased from the trustees of the Winks estate a farm in the 1 ongahoe \ alley of 514 acres, paying a small deposit and giving a mortgage for the balance. This farm I considered at the time was very cheap, but owing to the misfortunes of another party, into which I was brought by my commercial credit, was damaged to such an extent that I was unable to stock up the farm and had to let the grazing for two years at a rental that did not quite clear my outgoings. I have been sued by the trustees .of the Winks estate for interest, and had to allow judgment to be entered against me. During the war I guaranteed a first mortgage over a farm of 658 acres in the Uruti. district. I had eventually to take a transfer of this property, but it was sp deteriorated that it is to-day of very little value. I hold a mortgage of 436 acres to secure payment of the sum of £BOO. Owing to deterioration this mortgage is not of face value. “A meeting of my creditors was held a month or so ago, and it was decided that all my assets should be sold and distributed pro rata. .The assets have been sold, and. the proceeds are held by tfie Farmers’ Co-op. Owing, however, to some creditors pressing, I have been forced to file.” .Several creditors expressed the opinion that the bankrupt's statement was of a very meagre character, and unsatisfactory as a result. In reply to the D.O.A. bankrupt said he had a second mortgage over a piece of land on the Okau-Mangaroa Road, in the Uruti district, in the amount of £BOO, and there was a first mortgage to the Government Advances Department of £lOO. The area of the section was 436 acres, and the mortgage deed was in his possession. He was requested to produce the document immediately. To Mr. Spratt bankrupt said when he made the arrangement with the trustees of the Winks estate as to the Tongahce farm he had not stated that he had £3OO in cash to put into the farm. He had certain stock which he had expected to sell to advantage, and a probable bonus of £lOO, but the latter had not eventuated. He had arranged the sale of stock for June 14, and from the proceeds of this sale he had hoped to pay the interest. He sub-let the place to one Douglas in May, 1926, and received the rent on May 15, but did not pay his rent to the Winks trustees, but applied the money in the payment of wages. “CAUSE OF HIS DIFFICULTIES.” Bankrupt said his son owned a motorlorry, and lie had paid him £6O on account of wages, and still owed him £l2O, but this amount would not be claimed) At this stage bankrupt’s pass book was obtained fro mthe bank. To the D.O.A. bankrupt said he had borrowed about £BO from Mr. R. Davis two years ago, repaying £4O about, a year ago. He borrowed a further £5O about March last. In reply to Mr. Spratt he declined at first to state who the person was whom, lie stated, bad been the cause of hrs difficulties. The D.O.A. insisted that the question should be answered. Bankrupt then stated that the person was Thomas Waite, of Stratford, who was made bankrupt some time ago, but he did not benefit from Waite’s bankruptcy since Waite owed him £9OO. He had not previously been bankrupt. Mr. Cressey stated that the nett amount in the hands of the Farmers’ Co-op. from the sale of stock and dairy company shares was £333 16s. The D.O.A. was requested to investigate the position as to the motor truck, and the question of the suggested preferential payment to the son, since the date of the notice of the first meeting of creditors was September 23, 1926. No resolutions were proposed by the creditors. UNRULY IN THE CELLS. Found drunk in Albion Street at 7.10 p.m. on Wednesday by Constable O’Donoughue, Robert Johns was marched off to the lock-up and apparently placed in safe custody, but- his conduct when in the cell was somewhat unruly and as a result Government property was damaged to the extent of 15s. Johns appeared before Mr. J. S. Barton, S.M., at the Hawera Court yesterday, charged with being drunk in Albion Street and with wilfully damaging Government property. The defendant pleaded guilty to both charges and after Sergeant Henry had outlined the case, the defendant was fined 12s 6d, in default 48 hours’ imprisonment with hard labour on the first charge, and on the second charge of damaging Government property he was fined 5s and ordered to make good the damage. Seven days were allowed defendant in which to pay the fines. FAILURE TO ATTEND DRILL. At the last sitting of the court Leslie Church appeared before the Magistrate on a charge of failing to attend a parade of B Company of the Ist. Taranaki Battalion on September 17, but the case was adjourned to allow the defendant to produce a statement from the superintendent of the Hawera Fire Brigade to the effect that the defendant was on duty with the brigade several days during each week. When the ease came on yesterday the de-

fendant produced the necessary statement from the superintendent to the effect that he was on duty three nights each week and was available every night. In reply to Sergeant-Major C. S. Mahoney the Magistrate said defendant should notify the Defence authorities of the fact that he was on duty or should apply for exemption from drill. Defendant was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. EXEMPTION FROM DRILL. A young man, Herbert Leonard Smith, appeared before the court yesterday and applied for exemption from military training. Sergeant-Major C. S. Mahoney stated that the applicant was an employee on a merry-go-round and the area officer had written instructing him not to oppose the application. The Bench: Is this the merry-go-round that provides us with music?” referring to the roundabout located near the Courthouse. Sergeant-Major Mahoney: Yes. Witness said the only objection raised was on account of the applicant’s failure to return a greatcoat. The Magistrate said he saw no reason why the applicant should be exempted from training because he worked on a merry-go-round, but he would grant the application in face of the area officer’s instructions, although he did so unwillingly. MAGISTRATE’S COURT. A first offending inebriate arrested at 8.45 p.m. on Wednesday was fined 7s 6d, in default 24 hours’ hard labour by Mr. J. S. Barton, S.M., at the Hawera Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Judgment by default in favour of plaintiff was entered in the ease A. H. Shaw v. J. Howden for the sum of £6 18s 6d (costs £1 10s 6d). Disobedience of a maintenance order made on May 21 in respect of his wife, Amy Lock, providing payment of £2 2s 6d per week, was alleged against Mervyn Oliver Lock. The arrears amounted to £2l 4s 6d. “I think clearly you eould have paid this sum. You have been ordered by the court to pay the arrears and you must pay them,” said the Magistrate after hearing evidence. Defendant was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment with hard labour, to be released on the payment of £5 of the arrears with the cost of the arrest if any. For driving a motor-car along High Street at night on October 23 with no rear light showing, Ernest A. Grigg, a farmer of Ratapiko, was fined 15s, costs 16s. GENERAL ITEMS. At about 2.45 p.m. yesterday the fire bell sounded its warning and the brigade proceeded to the Islington Tea Rooms in High Street, where a small outbreak had occurred in the kitchen. The fire was soon extinguished with the small hose before any great damage had been caused. Owing to having to reduce all lines of; stocks J. N. Anderson, White Hart Hotel, is offering special Christmas hampers of all lines of selected liquors at bargain