|
Below is a trancript of a case
where John Betts was accused of malicous damage, in Victorian times reputable
firms were plagued by others stealing their bottles and refilling them
with their own home brewed ginger beer. There are reports of unscrupolous
characters brewing ginger beer in their bath tubs before selling it. Although
Betts had a large premises, some ginger beer sellers couldn't afford large
premises and would often brew in sheds or in their public houses.
Transcript from The Cambrian
printed in 1873
Alleged malicious
damage-Mr. John Betts, manufacturer of aerated water in this town, was
charged with having maliciously destroyed about two dozen ginger beer
bottles and five glasses of iced cream, the property of an itinerant ginger
beer seller named Francis Podesta, doing damage to the amount of 4s.11d.
Mr. Clifton appearing for the defendant.
The complainant said that on Thursday last he was selling ginger beer
just outside the entrance to Bryn-y-mor cricket ground , where the flower
show was being held. He had a number of bottles of ginger beer and some
iced cream glasses on a cart, and among them were a few bottles bearing
the words "Betts, manufacturer, Swansea"
The defendant who appeared to have been drinking something stronger than
ginger beer, came up to him and called him a robber, and proceeded to
smash the bottles, and in doing so broke also five iced cream glasses
which had been placed next to them.
In cross-examination by Mr. Clifton the complainant said, "I made
the stuff I put into the bottles myself -any fool can make it, I have
sent the defendant a bill for the damages done and am going to put him
in the County Court for it, please God, if I can"
In reply to the bench he said he had bought the bottles marked with Mr.
Betts's name, among many others, at the sale of the stock of Mr. Hatton,
of Wind Street. Mr. Clifton, for the defendant, said the defendant suffered
a great deal of annoyance and loss in the consequence of the dishonest
conduct of the complainant and other parties who were in the habit of
buying from marine store dealers as many bottles as they could with Mr.
Betts's name upon them, to fill those bottles with, "stuff any fool
can make" and then sell the contents to the public, who, of course,
supposed that the miserable mixture they were drinking was Betts' ginger
beer, the consequence being that he was greatly injured not only in purse
but in character. Mr. Betts never sold the bottles; and consequently any
person having them in his possession as the defendant had, was dealing
with stolen property.
The complainant said that he had bought the bottles at Hatton's sale,
but this was not true,
As he could prove they had not been made until long after Hatton's sale
took place.
He contended that Mr. Betts had a perfect right to do as he had done with
his own property, and his conduct could not be considered as "malicious"
within the meaning of the act. The bench complimented Mr. Clifton on the
cleverness of his argument, but said they were quite against him; the
defendant might have been justified in what he did in respect to the bottles
bearing his name, but he was not justified in breaking others. They suggested
he should pay the complainant the amount he claimed in respect of the
latter. Mr. Betts consented, and the case was so settled. Mr. Fowler told
the complainant that if he or others persisted in getting possession of
Mr. Betts bottles, and putting their own stuff in them, they would be
placing themselves in a false and dangerous position, and would probably
expose themselves to proceedings of a very serious character.
Contact Me
|
|