LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 624, 29 September 1909, Page 11

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT.

• THE GEAR WORKS ACCIDENT. I '' INJURED MAN AWARDED -ESO. -,-..v. * A, claim was heard in the Supremo Court' yesterday/ in which " Clarence Stanley. Towner, tcarpohtdr, 'pf 'Petorie,' . claimed 'MOO ' damages • fro%|!io;Gei\r, Meat Preserving Company, Ltd., : as-^o.mj^h^tion. 1 received; in , the ■ fall'of a roof at the company's works on March S3 >lastV. , ' ■ The'case was, heard by Mr. Justico Chapman and,;a f jury -of-.four—W. R.-.Hare i '(foreman), Alfred Newport, .'. John Hyde, and Richard •••> Mr.-. 'Wilford and Mr. Hindraarsh appeared ! and Mr. Skerrett, K.C., .with ■ him-'.,;Mt.'-,T.. I'. Martin, .'for the- defendant , company.' ' : -V ' 'MrXwilford said that the defendant company ■ #dm!tted.* tie .statements 1 made by the ■ plaintiff m. to -;hdw the accident: and the company*; adinittod that it was .their fault. • -he only-{joint for the jury was how m'uoh compen-sation'-,Jjlaintiff was entitled to; ■ The accident had' keen. brought- about by the; iiegligcmcG-of-,. ' the; defetidatit company,- v iii corinection_witfr a structuro,'. that was being erected. Plaintiff was • enlplo'yed as a carpenter, and when the TOof ; collapsed he was working at the it. '.Two" ribs were broken, [ltid some of-tho purlins,; in falling, injured him internally. He iWas;:a physical wreck, had lost his nerves : completely, and could not sleep at night.; He' ■ started with fright at. nothing,; and his earning .'power.'.was reduced., An. employer was loth to engago d nervous man, because he was'running si ,risV every., time the'employee' went up on a ecaifold or building. ' , ' Dr. D. -that; two; months ago; .Towner, was in an extremely nervous stato,■ : and ' was;'easily ' startled. ' His nervous, system: > had received- a severe : shock. -' Completo rest and;*,'change,' passage,' and 'ole.ctricity twere the; proper for a .neurasthenic ' patient. A; man' i ill his present f condition could not do .work' on buildings or scaffolding, but.ho would probably,'.bo able ; to resume that class of . work. : The. friictured ribs .werp completely, mended, - but-onS-Kip. 'was held rigiil".£» 'i ;: <-. : 'k_ ;. Drir'Pomv■ of.:Petono,- : who had-'trefttod.;tho injured- man from the date of the .accident, also'rdeSctibed his .condition, and expressed tho .opinion j that he would be' able to resunip/his ordinary Employment in six months time.'. :Ho would- probably regain sufficient (confidence, in. . twelve-months to do work on-scauolds.i . . . Plaintiff, in evidence, stated that his. wages - had .l)een', i£3.-per week, and he _had received ; nlioiit'-J!lo'iu wages since the accident - \ : >J&frthe defence, :-Dr. * Ja.me? ;gave the.-rpsult his'exauiinatiin. 'Ho ;had no evidence that ..plaintiff-had suffered greatly.- , -. considered that, when tho. wojry, .'of the .case '.was .over,- tho'.'plaintiff would; bo. able, to resumo work almost at 'Once. /v. i The. jury deliberated for twonty minutes,; ■and.lreWned .a verdict for .plaintiff ]tm::£~j>p,: damages.' Costs were'allowed as,per.scale,'with: 'costs',of;Second counsel five.guineas, witaesses, -experises'Jand disbursements.to. bo fixed by the registrar.'. ; ' ' SALES OF BEER IN BULK. ' | : ',"V iIOTEIiKEEPEPiS' EIGHTS. ' ; Befpro Mr, Justico .Chapman, an application ; was macfe.on 'Sieptember.-li .by lVancis ju'Parland,''licensee of Hotel' Cecil, upon, an originating summons, under the Declaratory Judgments Act','Vl9oß," for 'an' interpretation of tho Beer DutKAit. The application was for an order '' declaring', that 1 Section " 37. of - the Beer Duty -.' Act, ;l9oßj did.not prohibit the sale or delivery. . for silo 1 -or.'. consumption in. cades., or - .vessels confiihirig' Quantities .of 'two gallons and up-* . wardk' v by/.holders of' publicans and .wholesale "'■iiientes of beer -drawn from : brewers' . casks af ter;'the'? dutt-stamp-on •tho' casks had 1 been jdulyfcariclslled and:the duty paid, thereon, or fdr? such'■interpretation" as tho .Court 'deemed : just.; Thcro were two grounds'% ~tljo,appli'- ' cation :;(1) That it had long been the practice .-of fctil'de'rs of'publicanfStaS" feholcsalo licenses :■ to sell, beer . drawn : from brewers' ; casks >fupon: .-' \rhieli the duty. stamp 'had: been cancelled, end, ; paidj 'in casks or '.vessels - containing a' uantities of two: gallons or upwards; and_(2) ie'f plaintiff .claimed; the. right .to, sen ..beer. ; ,in {Hiij(manner by virtue ,6f his publican s - ' f MK/sitcrretKi:,KlC.i ;{nith 'him'Mr./Sharp, • appeared; for.',plaintiff, ' and "Mr. .'Myers for ; the, Minister'i for. Customs (defendant). ; _ . , V., In-giving judgment iyestarday •xtotjrnsnfer: {aji - Honour . remarked■'that'-it had ' apparently-'long-heehvthe-practice/for. publicans to buy.' beer in jbdsks'from brewerß with the stamps affixed: arid cancelled, and-to sell it in jars or . casks tin? quantities from. .two. gallons "upwards. It was contended . that Section 17 of the. Beer Duty' Act, 1908 V prohibited th« practice: . If, this;,wer9, so, ,a publican 1 could only sou small, cases'ofi'beer'as'ne had bought thom * from the/ brewi'r.s His Honour did not think that, this ■ cciild'be'the moaning of. Section 17.. Tho sec-tion-related to sales from breweries, and not 'V to sales-by pnblicans selling under .the authority of the. Licensing' Act, f 1908," The 'only duty pay-' able ;'was .one payablo by Ihe brewer (Section' ■ 14),'iT?ho;was'the only.person to whom the-Col-!:lector coilld sell duty ptamps {(Section Js).;,:»fhe, ,; ! .bre#cr iialohe was.\ f ciJmmjinded amSj .'itho ; ; stamp to the plug or fitopper of the ca.sk (Sec- ! ti tion ltt)V It was • not- easy :to< suggest- the publican; 'could v comply with - the' ; prescribed -i - antv;'^;lt; was, however,' argued . that- he.- could 'isell; tiiq'dot"he had'bought,tbut that, he ■could', 'not 'divide it in tli'a'.manner. Honour ..did; riot 'think that, he was prohibited from doing fo by .Section 17. ;It was : not -cor- : rect .to. ; Vsav-that. he was'selling in bulk.-Whert ; .a m'an'had a'cask of,.beer,nnd sold'.it "by divjd-.- ' iing'.'it into smaller'loto he .was no, longer sell- . ing; in"'bulk, .hut in detail., In ' more goneral .. termS''.the-iwhole statute 'might bo referred-.to ' n-s a .fevenuo Act, and not a vfegulativo Act. - '' ilts vpurjiose i'.was .to, ensure the collection :of ' - duty : once,Vand only-once, ,aiid to ehsuro the collection of. that duty from brewers onlyv -It v ; : was not intended to impose a restrictive oblipra- ' : Licerising' Actv'. 1008.'.f-- . ■•' .■■- 1 ' ;of costs .was reserved. . " - ' ' THE PORIRTJA RESERVE.

NOXIOUS WEEDS AND STRAYING, SHEEP. i-Hearing'of tho-case.-in..which tho./Por;;.ua College Trust Board sued Mary Jaue Jiliett (I'orirua) and Herbert John Jillctt (Ohau) for £250' for alleged breach of coveuant was con4i'nti6(l beforei' Mr. .Justice Cmipman.-and-'a-common jury.;Of= four—J,;A.: Ejclsmott. ,(foresail), .J:- J. Frasor,. Henry.-Green, and Jv JameEon,- ;, :-Vv : •: Mn. JVardi appeared • foAlaiiiH&B,;andMri defendants/ t Jt.&is, explained. that 500 acres of .tho board s ' endowment near -Porirua Harbour bad'.- been ' leased' in'lß94!to William Jiliett, farmer, now. deceased.-;lnserted .in the lease there were cer- ' tain 'coyehants-nordinary- -conditions- of-lease— with others which provided for the removal of tauhina, : gorse,., scrub,- . thistles, and. .other noxious tt;cedsVThe trustees nllqwed Jjllatline, ijearfS .rent ili"'respect of certain improvements which: tho lease recraired'him to put on tho land. . .The 'lease also/required ,;hini ■> to ■ substantial .fences, • within.,four■'. years: frtni the comrtericement'of his'jeage. ..The claim was for dataSges. for., alleged failure'in the'part'of tho lessep to fulfi},.,tpe ■coTeflniits.'.pfs|he .lease,,jand it ■waS'hiiid'o against" the executors. of .tho' will -. the.deceased. ; . ■i'.i'C. - , ;The; hearing of - evidence, for the.,defendants was'not concluded whep the Court adjo'urned.-