SAMPLE OF WINE

Waikato Independent, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3550, 6 May 1939, Page 5

SAMPLE OF WINE

SUPPLIED TO MAORI SALESMAN AND MERCHANT IN COURT Decision was reserved by the Magistrate, Mr W. H. Freeman, in the 'Cambridge Curt on Thursday/ after hearing a case in which Horace Herbert Hudson, a traveller, "and Anriis A. Corban, wine merchant, of Auckland, were separately •charged with supplying liquor to a native for consumption off licensed 1 premises. Hudson was also charged with soliciting orders for liquor in a prohibited area. Mr E. J. Prendergast, of Auckland appeared for Corban, who pleaded not guilty. Hudson was not repro. sented by counsel. Sergeant J. Fry of Hamilton, stated that Hudson was in the employ of Corban, and during his travels canvassing for wine orders, he entered the Maungatautari district. An order was taken from a Maori at the pa for two gallons of wine, the supply being delivered by Corban. When the order was taken, Hudson had given the Maori a sample of wine, and it was this which constituted the first breach. Constable C. H. Maisey gave evidence that the Maungatautari Pa was six miles south of the confiscation line, and within the area of the King Country. The constable stated that the case of wine in Court had been taken from the railway station, where it had been awaiting collection by the Maoris. Charlie Smith stated that he had ordered the wine after tasting samples. A Maori girl who was at the pa at the time corroborated the fact.

Horace Herbert Hudson said he was employed last October by Corban, a wine and spirit merchant, of Auckland. He was paid on commission only, and was allowed to give samples to customers. To Mr Prendergast, Hudson denied that he was an employee of his brother-in-law, but said he was a sub-agent of Corban. It had been necessary for him to sign a bond with the firm. He said he had been told that he could supply wine to a half-caste. ';'

Mr Prendergast contended that Hudson was not a direct employee of Corbans, and thus his client was not responsible for Hudson's.action. In the witness-box, Corban stated that he had not had any business with Hudson whatever. It was Hudson's brother-in-law who received all -commissions and additional samples of wine when required.

Mr Prendergast submitted that Corban had no power over Hudson, who was, neither his employee nor his agent. Therefore anything that Hudson had done was not the responsibility of, Corban. "flie stated that he would reserve his decision.