RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 970, 17 August 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, GISBORNE.

/i < ’ J < ' Jl)l. -r* 1 ■ '»■ r? Tuesday, August 17th, 1881. [Before M.. Pbice, R. G. Gibbons, (Manager for Mr. G. Johnstone of the Gisborne Brewery}, was charged by Mr. D. Johnston, Collector of Customs at Gisborne, with having neglected to affix a duty stamp on a certain cask of beer before leaving the pj-emfaes of the said brewery. The information was laid under the 15th section of the Beer Duty Act, which prevides that “ Every brewer shall affix upon the plug or stopper of the tap-hole in the head of every cask, when sold or removed from such brewery, a stamp denoting the amount of the duty payable upon such beer, in such * way that the said stamp will be destroyed upon the withdrawal of the liquor from such cask, <j r upon the introduction of a faucet or other instrument for that purpose. At the time of affixing such stamp cancel the same by writing or imprinting thereon the name of the brewer by whom such beer was made, or the initial letters thereof, and the date when cancelled.” Mr. Nolan prosecuted, and Mr. Brassey appeared for the defence, and took an objection to the information, as the essence of the

charge was in not affixing and cancelling the stamp ; but he would not press his objection, as he would let the case be tried on its merits. Mr. Nolan requested his Worship’s ruling as to whether, under the 48th clause of the Act it did npt lie with the defendant to open the case. His Worship said such was unusual, and ruled for plaintiff to open his case. David Johnston, sworn, said : I am Collector of Customs at the port of Poverty Bay. From information received I found and seized a cask of beer from the Albion Hotel. It had a stamp on it at the time,, but it was not affixed in the proper The cask is in the shed. I have not seen the contents of the cask. I know tiie cask contains beer. I know it is beer. I seized the cask under the 16th section of the Beer Duty Act. The stamp on the cask is quite correct in amount. By the Court: The duty was paid. I do not know if the stamp is correct in amount. The stamps are in different colors. I seized the cask because it left the brewery without a stamp on iU ■ ' S. M. Wilson deposed ; I remember a cask of beer coming to my hotel. Ido not know where it came from. I expected a cask from the Gisborne Brewery. I saw a cask outside the hdtel without * stamp, and ref used to receive it. I sent to Mr. Gibbons and informed him, when he sent a stamp, and my servant put it on the cask. Mr. Johnston seized it after I put it in the cellar. ' . , By Mr. Brassey : I did not inform the Collector of Customs. Ido not know the contents of the cask, they might have been water, rum er brandy. No more than 5 minutes elapsed between the arrival of the cask, and the affixing of the stamp. The stamp was affixed in the same way as those I receive from otherbreweri.es. Frank Cummings gave testimony. He went to Mr. Gibbons aril got the stamp, and returned to the hotel and put it on the cask, on the end. Mr. Gibbons told the absence of the stamp was a mistake. Mr. Brassey for the defence contended that there was ho offence under the AoL The gist of the offeaoe was under the 15th Section-bf the Act, but the penalty sought to be imposed was under the 17th section which; provides only for “ refusing or neglecting to affix and cancel ” stamps; Had the information been laid under the 18th section, the essence of which is a guilty knowledge of a breach of the law, he, the learned counsel, would have e>d guilty with extenuating circumstances ; t where it is sought to impose a penalty of. £2O, without .mttigiUwii he felt bound to raise the objection he minit the interests of hie client. Mm Brartty' f ought the point.well, and ingeniously argued, with a good show of reason, that the information was at fault. His Worship, alter hearing Mr. Nolan’s reply, said there was much force in Mr. Briftwy’* argument and, as this was the first offence* in Gisborne, under the Act, he should reserve hia judgment till Thursday morning.