The Queen against Henry Joseph Lancashire
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 03 June 1857 |
| Date | 03 June 1857 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 119 E.R. 1458
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 3 Jur. N. S. 1095; 5 W. R. 658 (sub nom. Lancashire v. Staffordshire JJ.). Followed, Jones v. Whittaker, 1870, L. R. 5 Q. B. 543.
the queen against henry joseph lancashire. Wednesday, June 3d, 1857. By stat. 9 G. 4, c. 61, s. 18, a penalty is imposed on every person who shall, without a licence, sell any exciseable liquor by retail to be drunk on the premises; and by aect. 37 " exciseable liquor " is to include sweets or wine, which now are or hereafter may be charged with duty either by customs or excise.- By atat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 77, s. 9, the excise duty on sweets or made wines is repealed ; but, by sect. 10, the duty on licences to be taken out by retailers thereof is continued, and all such licences shall still be taken out.--Held that a person who, since the stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, e. 77, sold sweets or made wines by retail &c. without a licence could not be convicted under sect. 18 of stat. 9 G. 4, c. 61, sweets and made wines being no longer exciseable liquors within the meaning of that Act. Dissentiente Erie J. [S. C. 3 Jur. N. S. 1095; 5 W. R. 658 (sub now. Lancashire v. Staffordshire JJ.). Followed, Jones v. Whittaker, 1870, L. R. 5 Q. B. 543.] This was an appeal against a conviction by two justices of the county of Stafford under stat. 9 G. 4, c. 61, s. 18, whereby the appellant was convicted for permitting and Buffering to be sold by retail for value in a certain house and premises of him &e. a certain quantity of wine, to be then drunk and consumed in the said house and premises, the $aid wine being an exciaeable liquor, in respect of which a duty of excise wa* then and there by law charged : and he (the appellant) not being then [840] and there duly licenced so to do &c. The appeal came on to be heard at the Sessions, and was respited; and, by consent, and by order of Wightman J., the following case was stated for the opinion of this Court. The appellant was a British wine merchant and retailer of sweets or made wines, and, at the time of the sale alleged in the conviction, carried on the said trade in a shop and premises at Bilston, in the county of Stafford. He had, at the time, an excise licence for his shop and premises, as a retailer of sweets or made wines, in the ordinary form taken out by retailers of sweets or made winea under The Excise Act, 6 G. 4, c. 81, for which 11. Is. and Is. additional was paid; but he had not obtained any licence of justices under stat. 9 G. 4, c. 61. The appellant was in the habit of selling and sending out by retail British made port, sherry, cowslip, ginger and other made wines in quantities less than a cask containing 15 gallons, and sometimes as small as a glass, and of allowing the same to be consumed on the said premises, across the counter. He did not sell foreign wines, and therefore did not take out a foreign wine licence. On the 28th of July 1856, the appellant, for (a) The arguments on the construction of the by-la.w have been omitted, (b) Reported by W. B. Brett Esq. 7HL. &BLM1. THE QUEEN V. LANCASHIRE 1459 the sum of three pence, sold a glass of sweets or made wine of English manufacture, being a quantity less than a quarter of a pint, to be then drunk and consumed on the said premises; and the same then was drunk and consumed on the said premises of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mkwanazi v Van der Merwe and Another
...not have H got this evidence if he had used reasonable diligence.' Kyk ook Roberts v London Assurance Co. Ltd. (1), 1948 (2) SA 838 (W) op bl. 839, en Bellstedt v SA Railways & Harbours, 1936 CPD 397. Dit blyk dus dat die oorweging waarna in hierdie gewysdes verwys word beskou kan word as e......
-
Van Aswegen v Fourie
...nie toegepas was deur die Volbank van hierdie Afdeling in Slabbert, Verster en Malherbe (Bloemfontein) Bpk v de Wet, 1963 (1) SA 835 (O) op bl. 839 en 840, nie. Ek kan met eerbied my nie vereenselwig met die aangehaalde passasie G in Barkhuizen, N. O. se saak, supra, nie en wat de Wet se sa......
-
Van Aswegen v Fourie
...nie toegepas was deur die Volbank van hierdie Afdeling in Slabbert, Verster en Malherbe (Bloemfontein) Bpk v de Wet, 1963 (1) SA 835 (O) op bl. 839 en 840, nie. Ek kan met eerbied my nie vereenselwig met die aangehaalde passasie G in Barkhuizen, N. O. se saak, supra, nie en wat de Wet se sa......
-
Mkwanazi v Van der Merwe and Another
...not have H got this evidence if he had used reasonable diligence.' Kyk ook Roberts v London Assurance Co. Ltd. (1), 1948 (2) SA 838 (W) op bl. 839, en Bellstedt v SA Railways & Harbours, 1936 CPD Dit blyk dus dat die oorweging waarna in hierdie gewysdes verwys word beskou kan word as een va......