H—3B

668. It appeared to us that if the Department intended to withdraw the approval of depots as quickly as possible, the approval of New Zealand Breweries two depots at Christchurch should have been withdrawn since the Act of 1940 was passed. In other cases approval has been withdrawn on the ground that the depot was not reasonably necessary to enable the brewer to vend his beer because the brewery had ready access to the railway. Furthermore, as will be seen later (para. 675, infra), the company has also an unlicensed store for Speight's beer at the premises of W. Longdin in Christchurch. 669. We referred this matter to the Comptroller of Customs, who informs us, by letter of 9th April, 1946, that Manning's bottling store is considered reasonably necessary to enable the company to carry on its business, but that, as the company has a wholesale license in respect of the premises at 15 Bath Street, the question of the revocation of the .approval of the premises as a depot will be placed before the Minister. 670. The depot at Carterton and the depot at Otamita are each a depot situated outside a no-license district, for a brewery situated within a no-license district. Each depot is necessary because a brewery situated in a no-license district may only sell beer from an approved depot outside a no-license district (section 43 of the Finance Act, 1915). 671. The Customs Department informs us that the approval of a depot situated five miles or more from the boundary of a no-license district for a brewery within a no-license district is the only case where a new depot would now be approved under section 46 (2) of the Finance Act, 1917. 672. The Customs Department points out that, though a depot for a brewery must be removed when a change in the boundaries of a no-license district brings the storage depot within five miles of the boundary of the district, the brewery itself, or an ordinary bottling warehouse established before the carrying of no-license, or an hotel, similarly brought within five miles of the no-license district, need not be removed. The Department considers that this provision constitutes an anomaly and that the anomaly should be removed. Since this proposal was made the difficulty has been avoided for the future by the fixing of the boundaries of the no-license districts by Act of Parliament. Unlicensed Stores 673. In 1926 New Zealand Breweries was granted permission to hold stocks of Speight's beer in unlicensed stores at various towns throughout New Zealand and to deliver stocks from these stores in quantities of not less than 18 gallons. The reason for this arrangement was that Speight's beer was shipped to various parts of New Zealand and that it was convenient to have stores for distribution at or near the ports to which the shipment went. The Department was not prepared to approve of premises as depots under section 46 (2) of the Finance Act, 1917, because the Commissioner of Police thought it would be objectionable for the agent to have power to sell or deliver, from the premises, beer in quantities of 2 gallons and over (see File C. 31/71/2 —letter of 28th September, 1925, from Commissioner of Police, Mr. Wright). 674. The Department then granted permission for the establishment of these stores subject to the following provisions (R. 317): — (1) That the beer is kept in a portion of the premises specially set apart for the purpose ; (2) That the beer is delivered only in vessels capable of containing 18 gallons or more ; (3) That the beer is delivered from the store in the vessels in which it is received —i.e., that it is not there repacked into smaller vessels ;

137