The Sun.
London, England, 1822-10-11 00:00:00

EXCISE COURT-GLASGOW.

On Friday last, an Exase Court was held in
this city, when a case of a peculiar nature, and one of very
great importance to the whole community, to the trade, to the
revenue, and to private individuals, . came before the justices.
A person, a spirit-dealer in the Gallowgate of this city, but who
lives in a house in the suburbs, was prosecuted at the suit of
the Crown for having inhis possession a quantity of Foreign
Wine without a permit, and for being a dealer in the same
without a license. The circumstances attending this case were
very remarkable. The Excise officers having obtained infor-
mation that this dealer had smuggled whiskey secreted in his
private house, went to it and demanded entrance from his niece,
a young woman about 18 years of age, that they might search'
the premises. This was readily granted, but in course of their
search they discovered, not as they expected, whiskey, but
seven gallons of Foreign Ruin and forty dozen of Port Wine,
all of which being without permits the 'officers seized and car-
ried off, and now came into Court to crave the condemnation
'of the articles, and infliction of the severe penalties which the
Act of Parliament awards.

The officers asserted this wine to be altogether illegal, got
in an illegal manner, and sold in an illegal manner, to defraud
the revenue. It came out that the dealer had bought this
wine from a person who had lately stopped payment, and at
the low price of twenty-six shillings per dozen, and that it was
carried to his house, but whether with a permit or not he could
not tell, but it probably was without any. The purchaser
afterwards sold thirteen dozen from the wine so purchased to
a person in the country, at an advanced price. The first sel-
ler's porter went to the purchaser's house for the wine, which he
packed and afterwards carried to his master's cellars,not knowing
the person's address to whom it was to be sent in the country,
and from which cellars it was afterwards sent to the country, to
the person who had bought it. The purchaser maintained that
he considered this wine as bona fide his private stock, and not
purchased for tho purpose of sale, but that, having more than
he had use for, he had parted with the quantity mentioned.—
In support of this he brought his niece, who acted as his
housekeeper, who swore that her uncle . used this wine at
his table ; but the officers, endeavouring to make out that it
was occasionally brought from his house to his cellar for sale,
questioned his niece as to that point; but the only informa-
tion she could give on that head was, that though often in her
uncle's cellar, she had only on one occasion seen him sell one
gill of Port-Wine. The officers endeavoured to substantiate
their charge by examining the dealer's nephew, a young boy
about twelve or thirteen years of age, who acted as his shop-
boy, but which, after considerable discussion, was over-ruled
by the Justices on account of his tender age. The proof 'not
being deemed satisfactory by some of the Justices, as to the
fraudulent intention and object of the dealer, the Excise
officers insisted upon bringing forward additional proof; but
which was decided by the Justices could not be allowed after
the case had been closed. It was also argued that the ex-
ceeding low price of the wine (being only 3s. more than the
duty, bottles, and corks) was of itself a convincing proof that
there was something illegal in the transaction. On the other
hand, it was advanced that the remainder of the seller's
stock of the same article, when disposed of at public sale
for behoof of his creditors, brought only 265. per dozen, and
that if there was any thing wrong in the affair, or detrimental
to the revenue, the fault lay with the seller—not with the buyer.
In coming to a decision, a difference of opinion existed among
the Justices as to the merits of the case, one contending that
the defender should be assoilzied from alfdamages or penalties,
and the others that they did not see the case in the same satis-
factory light. The decision, therefore, was, by a kind of com-
promise, that the dealer should be fined in 25 guineas with ex-
peaces, and be allowed to keep the Wine and Rum, but cau-
tioned how he made such purchases in future. Samples of the
wine under seizure were produced and tasted in Court, and be-
sides being exceedingly weak, were to all appearance made up
of some mixture or other, particularly of Cape 'Wine, but no
charge being made on this head, it was deemed unnecessary to
go into proof upon that point.
The case thus brought forward is a novel and a very serious
one. In it the question is involved, whether the public and pri-
vate stock of any dealer comes under the same regulations, and
whether the revenue officers have it in their power to go to any
private stock and, finding no permit, shall seize and 'obtain
the condemnation of the whole. This is certainly a very strong
power, and ought to be acted upon with great caution. Few
private families could, we apprehend, if visited in this manner,
show any permit for their stock, or even say if they had ever
obtained one. On the other hand, it is evident that unless
some power of this kind is vested in the revenue officers, that
enormous abuse* and frauds may be committed against the
revenue, under the cover of private stocks, both in covering the
introduction of illicit articles, and also in the disposing of legal
articles without paying the regular licenses, which must greatly
injure the revenue and die regular licensed trader. We believe
we are correct in stating, that in all cases where-the officers may
have suspicion or information that such practices are going
on, the law authorises them to enter any premises, and more-
over, and it is a fact which we would press upon the public
mind, that the law is imperative ; that no person, private in-
dividual or otherwise, shall send out or receive into their stock
or possession, in any manner, any exciseable article, parti-
cularly Foreign Wines and Spirits (especially when offered
at an under price) without giving and receiving a permit with
it, or if they neglect either, that both the sender and the re-
ceiver, subject themselves not only to such visits and searches
as we have just noticed, hut also to a severe penalty for the
fault, because the very want of a permit is a presumption, and
in fact, in the eye of the law, a proof, that the article is
smuggled and illegal. Besides, we believe, the law commands
that even private individuals should return into the Excise-
, Office all permits they may receive. Attention to these matters
may save them from much trouble ; and a Moment's ;election
will serve to convince every one of the propriety andnecessity
of such regulations.—( Glasgow Courier.)

Monday, at twelve o'clock, in pursuance of
public notice, a meeting of the subscribers to the Fund for the
Relief of the Distressed Irish was held in the Town-hall,
to consider how the balance, of 9301., in the hands of the Trea-
surer, should be appropriated. The Mayor having taken
the chair, and stated the object of the meeting, the Report
of the Committee appointed to superintend the disposal of the
subscriptions was read by Mr. Edward Cearns, junior. Mr.
Alderman Thomas Case then rose and moved that the balance
should be distributed among the public charities of Liverpool,
which was seconded by Mr. Thomas Booth, jun. A long de-
sultory conversation ensued, in the course of which several
amendments were proposed, two of which had for their object to
apply the balance either to the promotion of education in Ireland
or to purchasing clothing and bed-rugs for the distressed Irish.
—All the amendments, however, were ultimately withdrawn,
except two, on which divisions took place. The first division
was on an amendment proposed by Dr. Crompton, to apply 201.
of the balance to the relief of James Byrne, the individual
who had been convicted and punished for a libel on the noto-
rious Bishop of Clogher ; which was negatived, not more than
four persons voting for it. The next amendment, by Mr. S.
Hope, " that the whole of the funds now remaining in the bands
of the treasurer be invested. in trustees, to be applied to the fu-
ture wants of the shared the same fate, only three per-
sons holding up their hands in its favour. The original reso-
lution proposed by Mr. Case was then put, and carried almost
unanimously. The thanks of the meeting were then voted to
the Mayor, for his conduct in the chair, and about two o'clock
the meeting separated.—( Liverpool Advertiser.)
FLEET MARKET.—We think it necessary to
call the attention of the City Magistrates to
the present state of Fleet Market and its
neighbourhood. The Market is now frequented
by a gang of infamous ruffians, who commit
the most barefaced robberies in the middle
of the day, and have hitherto, we believe, es-
caped detectiek). The villains walk the market in
a cluster of five or six ; they have in general a
woman in their company, and the appearance
of the whole is that of a set of wretches of the
'very lowest description. They watch the pas-
sengers, and if they observe any one, a female
in particular, after having made a purchase deposit
'her purse in her market basket, or whatever
else she may be carrying, they gather round
her, hustle her as goodnaturedly as possible, the
woman cries out to make room for the lady, one of
the villains turn round and begs pardon, then the
whole gang disappear, and too often succeed in
carrying off the booty. The day before yester-
day a lady was robbed in this manner, and
wholly ignorant of her loss until she wanted her
purse to discharge a bill. Yesterday again, at
twelve o'clock in the day, another lady was
treated in a similar way, and the villains on both
occasions escaped detection. As to the neigh.
bourhood, the disturbances are almost nightly,
and wretched women, disgusting both in their
appearance and conduct, constantly patrole the
sides of the market, and interrupt the passengers.
—(New Times.) •