TRADE TOPICS

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIX, Issue 1093, 23 March 1911, Page 21

TRADE TOPICS

The members of the “Droppers’ Union ” — the law-breakers whose mission is to “drop” liquor about Masterton at prearranged places—are face to face with trouble (says the Wairarapa “Daily Times”). It is stated that a ‘‘Lifters’ Union” has been formed in Masterton, whose object it is to discover where the “droppers” have deposited liquor and then “lift” it without firs, receiving permission from the “droppers.” Recently, it is stated the “lifters” lifted forty-two bottles of beer. « • * * A decision of importance to publicans was given a„ Motueka on Monday by Mr Evans, S.M., in a case where a licensee was charged with selling Lquor to a. lodger after closing hours for consumption off the premises. The magistrate found that the lodger purchased liquor in a bona-fide manner and at his own expense, for the purpose of entertaining friends during a drive on Sunday. He held that the lodger was not entitled to constitute himself the agent for purchasing liquor for a party, but subject to this, his right to purchase /under the exception inj -his! favour was equally extensive with the landlord’s right to sell under license. The magistrate was sarisfied that the lodger had purchased a reasonable quantity of liquor on his own behalf, and not as agent for the party, and dismissed the information.

Governor Malcolm Patterson, of Nashville Tennessee, in a recen. speech, made the following reference to the licensing ques ion in the United States: —“When prohibition was first raised as an issue I opposed it Without the consent of the people, and foresaw the innumerable train of evils which would follow its enactment, the dissensions which would come and the opportunity which would be afforded for the demagogue to ply his trade and prey upon the state in the name ot a false morality.

In Banco, at Dunedin, recently, Judge Williams decided that brewers’ notices regarding liquor sent into nolicense districts must be forwarded simultaneously, or practically simultaneously with the sale and delivery of liquor. The matter was brought before the Judge expressly to get a ruling so as to settle the practice in Sou h Otago where Magistrates have various views and where Mr Bartholomew recently convicted Mr Whittingham, a brewer, for a delay of two days. The Judge upheld the conviction This is a new decision.

Mr A. Underwood who is in possession of the Criterion Hotel, Otahuhu, has conducted the hotel in first-class style since he assumed control. The building has a fine, handsome exterior, whilst the interior is neatly furnished, and bears evidences of careful supervision. Both Mr and Mrs Underwood have had a long experience in hotelkeeping, and their record is an eminently satisfactory one. * « 9 « Mr W. J. Napier announces that he is a candidate for a seat on the Harbour Board at the forthcoming electiojn. Mr Napier has a very wide knowledge of Harbour Board administration, having occupied a seat on the local body for years, and is recognised as a master of every detail on harbour matters. “DRY” WAIHI. SOME HOP BEER CASES. Four proprietors of hop beer establishments in Walhi —G. E. Wilson’ J W. Stone, G. Edwards, and W. A. Healy—were charged at the Police Court on Tuesday, on the information . of Sergeant MacKinnon, with carrying on the business of brewers

without holding a brewers’ license under the Beer Duty Act 190 8. This was a sequel to the action of the police in taking samples of alleged hop beer' from various shops last November, the same being subjected to analysis by the Government Analyst. Inspector Wright prosecuted, and Mr Mueller appeared for defendants, and pleaded “not guilty.” Mr McLaren. Government Analyst, gave the percen ages of proof spirit in the various samples as follows:—Edwards 11.05 and 2.51. Stone 9 63 and 9 49. Wilson 7.34 7.42, and 7.53; Healy 6 60 and 6.61. Brewers’ beer ranged from 7 to 10 per cent All

the samples were equal in strength to the ordinary article, and in one case the percentage was above it. The defence alleged that Wilson was not a brewer, but purchased the concentrated article, which he used in bottling, and that Edwards’ samples consisted of stock essence not made for sale, while Stone’s defence was that he acted in ignorance. One of the defendants in the hop beer cases said he manufactured hop ale from concentrated extract of “Bock ale.” The Magistrate wanted to know why he did not call it Bock ale, ins'ead of hop ale and the Inspector questioned the necessity for