MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5493, 15 December 1885, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. This Day. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., K.M.) I>auHKENNEBs. — A woman, who had not been previously convicted, was fined 5s for thia offence. Breaches of Licensimu Act. — William John White was charged that, on Nov. 30 last, not being duly licensed, he sold a dozen of beer to one Edward Chamberlain, at his premises, Tuam street west. Mr Holmes appeared for the defendant, who pleaded "Not guilty." Inspector Pender said the information was laid under section 159 of the Licensing Act, 1881. He called Sergeant Willis, who stated that he knew defendant had carried on business as a grocer, and also had a bottling store, which was not licensed under the Act. On the morning of Nov. UO he saw Edward Chamberlain, and made an arrangement with him. Chamberlain had a horse and

cart with him j the cart was empty. The sergeant searched Chamberlain and found 129 on him. Chamberlain then drove to White's stores and took the cart into the yard. The witness saw Alfred White, defendant's son, bring out a case containing bottles of beer and put them into the cart. • Witness never lost Bight of Chamberlain, and after he had driven a short distance, came up to him and found a dozen of beer in the cart. Searched Chamberlain again and found 6s 6d on him. Went back to White's with Chamberlain, and told White about tho beer being purchased. Defendant admitted having sold it, but said he was Belling it as agent for Cuddon and Co. Shortly after the Sergeant procured a search warrant, and went to White's stores and seized 11 hogsheads of beer and 90 dozen bottles — all the liquor on the premises. ' This beer was now in the possession of the police. Cross-examined : Defendant might have said that he was also agent for Innes and Co. ; but witness did not remember. Mr Cuddon had denied that defendant was his agent. Edward Chamberlain stated that on Nov. 30 he had bought a dozen of beer (produced) for 6s 6d from White's store. Paid for them, and got a receipt (produced) for the money. William James Cuddon, of Cuddon and Co., brewers, Fendalton : Said he knew Mr White, who was not an agent of theirs. The bottles of beer produced, labelled Fendalton brewery, were not the labels used by his firm. Cross-examined: Witnesß had taken over the business from bis father, William Cuddon, in March last. Did not know whether White was one of his father's agents. William Cuddon, senior, deposed that he had sold out on March 10 last. Had not employed White to sell beer as witness* agent. Had never authorised the labels on the bottles of beer produced. Cross-examined : Undoubtedly White was not an agent for witness to sell beer in" bottles ; but there was a commission paid to him for selling beer in kegs, three-gallon, or it might have been two-gallon kegs. White sold the beer, and the beer was delivered by Cuddon and Co. Witness did nob think the beer went through defendant's hands, but was not sure. His eon Frank knew more about it. William Charles Morgan, licensee of the White Horse Hotel, opposite to White'B store, stated that he knew defendant carried on the business of a bottler. Murray, assistant clerk to the )ity Council, deposed that defendant had no wholesale or bottler's license. The fee for a wholesale license was J240. Mr Rose, Collector of Customs, proved that on Jan. 14, 1885, William Cuddon, senior, of Fendalton, had a brewer's license. W. J. White, the defendant, said he had been agent for Mr Cuddon for three years and a half. Sold both in barrels and in bottle. It was bottled at the defendant's store, Tuam street west, about two mileß from the Fendalton Brewery. It was Cuddon's beer witness bottled. Witnesa sold some bottled beer for Mr Cuddon's son. The beer was sent down in casks, and witness sold it which way he liked. Mr Frank Cuddon knew that witness was selling beer bearing the labels produced. When Cuddon, senior, sold the brewery he did not give witness notice. To Inspector Pender : Asked witness to look at an account from which it appeared that defendant had sold bottled beer to Cuddon and Co. Defendant said that when they ran out of bottled beer at the brewery they came to him. It was the simplest way to keep the account. To the Bench : Defendant had to pay Cuddon for the beer after he had sold. Gave a receipt-note when the beer came from the brewery. Got the last lot of beer from Fendalton Brewery in July last. When witness handed over the money for the beer to Cuddon, 25 per cent more or less was deducted as defendant's commission. Mr Cuddon, sen., knew witness had labels bearing "Fendalton Brewery." The labels were frequently changed. Witness had any quantity of labels with Cuddon's name on, which he had used for bottled beer. Mr Holmes produoed one of these labels. Witness leased the premises from Mr Cuddon. Had a Bimilar authority from Mr Innes to sell beer. Mr Holmes produced a written authority from Mr Innes to defendant to sell beer in not less than two gallons. Witness said he was also agent for Strachan, of Dunedin. To Mr Pender: ; Could not name anyone to whom he had sold bottled beer having the labels Mr Holmes had referred to affixed. Bichard Frank Cuddon stated that he used to manage the Fendalton brewery for his father. Defendant Bold several kegs of beer on commission for Cuddon and Co. He never took beer to his own stores to sell. Mr Holmes: "That Bettles it." This concluded the defendant's case. Mi Holmes addressed the Bench in mitigation of the penalty. White was then further charged with having in his possession certain labels intended for bottled beer, not imprinted with the words " Bottled in New Zealand," and the name of the bottler. The offence was admitted. Mr Beetham, in giving judgment, said he would not order the liquor to be confiscated ; but for the first offence would inflict a substantial penalty. Defendant would be fined £10, and Is for the offence with regard to the labels. There seemed to have been an omission, so far as defendant was concerned, to procure the necessary authority I*o sell. The beer was ordered to be returned to defendant. CIVIL CABES. Defaults. — Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in the cases of Doyle v. Smith, claim 12s Gd ; Standard Sewing Machine Co. v. M'Londe, claim £1 5 Cookson v. Eichards, claim £8 10a ; Cotterill and Martin v. Barker, claim .£ll ■.9aj Wright v. Whelch, claim £10; Trent Bros. v. Mulligan, claim JGI3 3s 10d; Merson v. Boyle, claim £2 5s Gd ; Allen v. Smith, claim £7 11s 9d. Miscellaneous. — Deamer v. Medcalf was adjuurned to Dec. 23.— -Thacker v. M'Clatchie and M'lntosh. Mr Izard for plaintiff ; Mr Thomas for defendant. The olaim in this case, jES9 ICa 4d, hail been paid to plaintiff by cheque without the knowledge of his solicitors, who had issued the summons in accordance with instructions. Judgment was given for costs, £2 10s. ___.