COURT OF APPEAL.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 633, 9 October 1909, Page 15

COURT OF APPEAL.

;/HOTEL OF BEEH IN BULK. '; Xl^ ; ' 3. ARE,THEY LAWFUL. ' .'. :-: : ' ; / The right of. a'publican to soil beer in bulk ■' was argued'in a test case yesterday before tho' Cqirt of. Appeal—their Honours Justices Wilt Itams'. (Acting-Chief and Edwards..-:":' '.>. ' i ,; .-, A fortnight ago, Francis M'Parland, licensee of Hotel CociJ, rhado an application to the Supreme Court, which' was heard by.; his Honour/Mr. 1 Justice Chapman, .for an interpretation of, thoßeor Duty 'Act. ...Proceedings wero in the form'.of an originating summons' under./the' Declaratory. Judgments Act,: 1908. •Plaintiff; claimed before the. Supreme Court that/uhdor his publican's license, he had tho right, .upon' purchasing beer in, casks from ._a. byewer, : to draw off Some of it, and sell it in quantities ;Of two gallons and upwards, without any; "duty stamp, being affixed. ; ... :,' ', Tho ; Judge uphold, plaintiff's' contention,, de-' aiding that: "The' only duty payable is. one duty" payable by. the brewer (Section 11), who is the only' person to whom' the: collector can sell '.duty' stamps (Section 15). Tho brewer alOne is "commanded to affix the stamp,to the plug'of stdpper.lof.the cask (Section IB)., It is not' easy- to suggest.:how ,tho -publican, cancomply with tho prescribed duty. It-is argued,, however, that he can sell the lot which ho has'bought, but .that ■he canndt divide it in.the manner represented. Ido not think that he-is'prohibited from doing so by Section 17. It is.:not' correct/to' say that he is selling in. buik/ : That:.expression -is, a -relative .term describing a condition dependent on the ante-cedent'condition'-of tho thing-sold. When : a man has a, caskof .beer and sells, it .by dividing'it into'smallef lots, he is no longer selling in bulk, but.in detail. In more general terras, I ■ think ithe: Whole statute may be referred to as a.revenue :Act,,and not a .regulative Act. Its purpose is to ehsuTO tho.,collectionbf duty once, and,only' once,' and to-ensure the. collection', of that-mi ty," from brewers- only; -"It: was not'intended'to imposo' d restrictive obliga-. 1 fioh "on 'publicans : beyond .those': imposed '.by the-Licensing "Act; 1908.' ,: ..';.■-• .The appeal;case,..was argued : by Mr. Skerrett, K,oi, -and Tfti. • Sharp <for, appellant, :and by ; Mf.' MverS' (Crown',Solicitor) for.respondent. l: --Ur.' ; Myers said ■ that; the-whole' question' of the appeal'was as to tho ■ trrio' construction' of Snb-sectiatl 1, Section 17j of the Beer Daty 'Act; 1908,: which ■ read : "No person Bhall sell ;of deliver:for.sale or consumption any beer in .bulkj' except in- casks, of the prescribed sizes, andi-with'the-prpper.stamps duly "affixed, thereon - and ■ cancelled."'.' The.;' practice ,'had. existed for ;ma'r,y' ; /years in some ports, iron-:, tinued 'Mr. Myers,,':for .hotelkeepers' to ]piir., .ohaso;bSor'from:,brewers in tho original : casks;' and'decant th'O beer ; into other casks or-ikegs of two .gallons' or upwards for'snlo. The Court :was asked 'to decide .whether this: practice'was permitted by '»*■') The respondent had taken proceedings ,t6. tcpt -his rights, upon • receiving the ; following circular from tho..Secretary: for : :y-'f ;■':"-: ; ; :. ! i-!''. ■ ..-',!■ ■'.;.'•'■':' ; ''¥'V:.': ..j Department of Trade and' Customs, Wei-'; -lington, Jnly.l6,l9o9.—Beer Duty Act. The":, ':,■: Solicitor-General has given tho opinion that : .' ■..'. in tio.case can .Now., Zealand. Mer be legally :' ,:-;6old;in.bulk,-, except in the; br.igirtvl casks-^..•, ';- this includes' two-gallon jars—which havo. . i;'iboon sent outstamped from a brewery. Hence'; [ '; '.' the-'practice' r 6f "filling'.small kegs. or ,]'afs .' '■ ';■),by, bottlers.or hotelkeepers from...stamped-.'. : : is.illegal,-and must be discontinued.':.'; vln,.yiew. 6f rthe'fa'ct !that the .practice, has V- . ..•'■. obtained in .'some. 1 ports ; : for, ] many . years, -'. ■'"'collectors.are.requested.to give'publicity.;to, r ".this; instruction,,'.-.'and' if, thereafter, un- ■ ■ stamped tw6-gall6n jars or. kegs of beer: are..j foppd, ,thoy.ar6„to : ..be detained.;'and .'-the ,':, facts reported:'-to: ; this, /office.—Richard ."; ' Carter, : 'Secretary,Jihd Inspector. :'..'' -/^

■ The case, 6aid Mr. iMyers,. raised the tion whether it-was ,lawful': for the holders;af oithor wholcsalo or publicans' licenses to adopt,, :the'practice. .It ;was contended* by the ' jthe'r.' 'side that the; Licensing.Act;practically; govenSedi .the;matter; because the.holder .of a wholesale;; license was: entitled to ..sell liquor' in'. |aiiy<, quantity of two gallons and s upwards, ana; a"', publicans', license" entitled''; the- holder,' to/i'sell. liquor in-any quantities. The Beer Duty . Act, while, no doubt very largely for tho- imposition ofvdutics, . regulated to on extent the sale, of beer, also w «ffuUt«] the sale of boer and other liquors. Peisohs, other than brewers' could • only sell in %tho) original casks; the.holder.of a.wholesale license: could onlj'Sell beer.' in I ' bottlesy tir.in . the' casks Of .'proscribed Bi7.es: afid of ..prohibiting theisalo .ot beerari/casks other/than those of,, the prescribed ' sizes . was/'to. '-.establish 1 .. very,, useful •;m&chineryi for .the. collecting; of ;menue. The . main' object- of the .provision as to the: restricting" Of "tho'/Bale of"bfeer.-in- bulk, except in tho prescribed f casks, wa9,-clearly. to; protect tho .collection •of duty. , - The-brewer could ■ Hot stsll-beer in -bottles'; ;m must. s6ll it- in casks of,the prescribed.' sizes, ;V- .There.'wis. no pfOvi-: dbn-tii the 'Statute to'prevertt the. withdrawal of beer'fronS a cask, provided that it-, was withdrawn so as to cancel the stamp ■ in tho prescribed .way.. 'It' : wns:-'no.. | concern,:therefore. = of, tbo Customs i Department or of the beer ..duty .officers'so.'long, as;the:brewer affixed a Stamp to the plug .of each ; pask, and cancelled ■ ,it. Counsel's arguments; were .in line - with' tho judgment of his- Honour Mr. Justice Chapman. Tho Court reserved judgment.