CHOPS & CHANGES

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XI, Issue 513, 18 October 1900, Page 19

CHOPS & CHANGES

It is currently reported that Bellamy’s is troubled with a big “ slate.” ‘At Balclutha last week a man named W. Allan was fined £4O on a charge of sly grog-selling.

Messrs Arthur Guinness, Son, and Company, Limited, figure among the Grand Prix winners at the Pans Exhibition. Mr S. H. Carr of the Exchange Hotel, Onehunga, has sold out to Mr Edward Keating. Mr Carr goes into the grocery trade. The charges of breaches of the Licensing Act profered against Mr W. Woods of the Hukerenui Hotel, have been adjourned until next month.

Wife (at 7.30 p.m.) —What kept you so late, George? Husband (thickly) Been doin’ little shoppin’, dearsh. Wife —Really I And how much per gallon did it cost you, dear ? In last week’s issue the name Thomas Calder was given in error for Thomas Robertson, the late well-known traveller of Speight’s Brewery, Dunedin.

'Messrs Donovan and Adams have secured the rights of the grandstand bar and publican’s booth, at the Waikato Agricultural Show. The price paid was £32.

Much sympathy is felt for Mr A, A. Stewart, - the licensee of the Windsor Castle Hotel, Parnell, owing to his recent sad bereavement by the death of his mother. It is estimated that some 1500 ladies of Auckland visited the Strand Cafe one afternoon last week, in response to the invitation to afternoon i tea, given out by the proprietors, Messrs Stillwell and Gilman.

J no. O’Sullivan of the Alexandra Hotel, Parnell, will apply at the next meeting of the Parnell Licensing Committee, which takes place on tha sth December next, for a transfer of the license to Jno. Dennis McCartie.

Messrs Stillwell and^Gilman are coming in for a goodly share of the “catering business. They catered for the Railway Employee’s Social lately, and several more socials, and smoke concert committees have placed themselves in the hands of these well-know caterers.

Mr Jno. Mowbray, the genial managing director of the Great Northern Brewery Company, finds that owing to the pressure of business he cannot devote sufficient time to the position of one of the councillors for the Parnell Borough Council, his resignation has been followed by the election of Mr C. E. MacCormick, solicitor.

Mr W. J. Smith, who has for many years been proprietor of the Harbour View Hotel, Raglan, has sold out to Mr W. B. Baker, who took possession on the 10th inst. Mr and Mrs Smith will be much missed in Raglan, where they have made a large circle of friends. Mr Smith hopes to make a start about the New Year with a butter factory for Raglan. It is understood (says the “ West Coast Times ”) that the negotiations for the transfer of Mr Mandi’s brewery business to a public company have been broken off. It is said that the company had been floated successfully, but disagreement between the vendor and those who held the option as to some of the details led to a rupture. Actions for heavy damages are mentioned.

Love and beer defeated the combined forces of the law and spying, in a place called Pitfield, a mining town in Victoria. In order to restrict the sly grog-selling which was reported as being carried on in that township, several men were employed to obtain evidence. But the scheme fell through, because one of the men drunk himself into a state of insensibility in the very house in which he was to spy upon, anh another fell in love with the maiden who supplied the beer. Wide interest naturally attaches (says the “Melbourne Age ”) to a matter thrashed out before Mr Justice Holroyd, as to the dilution of whisky. The keeper of a hotel near St Arnaud had been proceeded against on an allegation that he had made use of the Mitchell trade mark in selling diluted whisky. The question was to a great extent as to how far whisky might be diluted. It was shown that Mitchell’s whisky, in what may be regarded as its normal state for retail purposes, was 10 per cent, under-proof, whilst that bottled specially for an Australian firm was 15 per cent., and that of the publican whose case was reviewed by Mr Justice Holroyd was diluted to a greater extent still. The magistrate had held that there was no intent to defraud, and dismissed the information, with costs, and Mr Justice Holroyd would not upset this decision, as the magistrate was the judge of fact.