DECEIVING LABELS

Hokitika Guardian, 16 July 1932, Page 5

DECEIVING LABELS

PUBLICANS FINED ■ . * / ».i • c ; . ... . . .. ,-I . . ; ; /. - '‘l ‘ J'.v ’’ •. > , | AUCKLAND UCTNSfcESi.AT FAULT ;- I . , • ■ r-i' _ \ • . • • r \ (Per Press Association — Copyright.) ' . AUCKLAND, July- 15. Three.licensees of’ Auckland hotels were prosecuted by the Department of Health in the‘Magistrate’s Court for alleged breaches of Section 210 of the Licensing Act, 1908. The defendants were, John Reilly, of the Royal Hotel, •Ernest 'Roy Baddeley, formerly of the Rising Sun, Hotel, .and Charles FLett, of the Commercial 'Hotel. It was alleged that they- had had in their possession whisky bottles ‘with labels affixed and that, without destroying the labels they made use/of the bottles . for the purpose of bottling liquor . for sale. All three‘pleaded not guilty. An analyist gave evidence in the case, of whisky that-was taken., from the Royal Hotel. ..

• ■•‘I; am ..satisfied, on, the evidence that the whisky' was neither ‘Black, or White’, nor ‘Perfection,’” said th 6 Magistrate. “It is true, that the defendant . defiles the oharges, but I oanriot be- < lieVe tbit' the whisky got into th e bottles in any other. way. than by the defendant or his OftlpJoyefis.” .Reilly Was fined £25 on one 1 ■ charge find £2O, the minimum amount * prescribed by the. law on on the other charge, , He was also ordered to pay' £3 l3s lid costs. < Simiilar. evidence''was. 'Leard .in ' the . case against both “ 'Baddeley . and Flett.. *'* ’ ' * \ * > Both of them denied^ a’l knowledge of ; how the labelled , bottles, came to, contain the whisky;.; wliich'• was not

genuine. : . f " . ,■ ./••.;• *•. . ' Baddeley was ’fined £2O on each of three charges, and. was .ordered to. pay flO.'2s, ''costs': , . ’’i Flett- wa s ; fined :;R2o_ on each.oKtwo chargee, with '.cost* ; of £7', 17s ild.