HOP BEER

Hokitika Guardian, 13 October 1930, Page 3

HOP BEER

MAKERS FINED £25. PROSECUTION BROUGHT IN AUCKLAND. AUCKLAND, October 10. A fine of £25-was imposed in the Police Court on an aerated water firm Waiwai Limited, which was charged with carrying on the business of a brewer without c license.

The prosecution was brought by the Health Department in regard to a brew of hop beer which contained more than the maximum amount of proof spirit and the offence was admitted by Mr Towle on behalf of the company. Mr M’lntosh, lor the department, stated that in March the defendant firm brewed a quantity of hop beer which was found on analysis to contain 7 per cent of proof spirit and a prosecution was brought by the police, the firm being convicted in May. Later, investigations were made by the Health Department, which was respon-' sible for the present prosecution, in regard to another brew which was found to contain over 4 per cent of proof spirit, On the foot of defend-' ant’s license to bretv hop beer was a warning that if, the- holder- of - license brewed beer of more than a limit of 3 per cent, prbof spirit, he would he; held■) to have brewed, beer. Tt was on this account that the charge was one o carrying on the business of a brewer. “What is the aleohole, content, of real beer?” asked the Magistrate (Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M.) “About 7 per cent proof spirit,” replied Mr M’lntosh. Mr Towle said that the firm had been in business for twenty-five years and had borne an excellent reputation. In March, a brew had been made which contained 7 per cent of spirit and a prosecution had followed. Since then, the firm had enforced an analysis of. each subsequent month’s brew and for the next four months the hop beer had an alcoholic content well below the limit. In the present case, it was very little above the limit and tyas nothing like the, previous brew in respect of which the prosecution was brought. “In that ease, I think that I remember that your Worship described it as beer with a kick in it,” concluded counsel. “I think that I said it would be » shock to some of the firm’s prohibition customers,” rejoined the Magistrate.

“I would point out that although each brew is made from the same recipe and ingredients, it is exceptionally difficult to guarantee a uniform percentage of proof spirit,”, concluded Mi» Towle. 1 • • ; ■ " The Magistrate then imposed a fine of £25 and ordered the defendant company to pay the costs of the prosecution.