a question of law in regard to a determination or judgment come to by the Justices, but amounted only to an objection in point of form, which did not fall within the provision for review in section 3, subsection 9, of the Summary Prosecutions Appeals Act, and the appeal dismissed. Leishman v. Colquhoun, High Court, 13th July 1877; Couper, iii. p. 482.-Scottish Law Reporter, xiv. p. 643.

Publican not guilty of breach of certificate although side door of shop open for cleaning before 8 A.M.

XXI. Appeal.-Held that a publican was not guilty of breach of a certificate in the Form No. 2, Schedule A of the Public Houses Acts Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1862, by keeping open house during prohibited hours, the side door of whose public house was proved to have been open before 8 o'clock A.M., for the purpose of cleaning the premises. Wood v. Campbell, High Court, 8th Nov. 1877; Couper, iii. p. 508. -Scottish Law Reporter, xv. p. 54.

Held hotelkeeper not guilty of breach of certificate by supplying engine-driver and guard of a passing goods train on a Sunday.

XXII. Appeal.-Held that the keeper of a hotel near a railway station, who supplied exciseable liquors at his hotel to the engine-driver and guard of a passing goods train upon a Sunday, contrary to the railway company's regulations, was not guilty of a breach of his certificate, in respect that the railway servants were in the position of bona fide travellers. Brunton v. Bremner, High Court, 6th Feb. 1878; Couper, iv. p. 1.-Scottish Law Reporter, xv. p. 346.

Conviction under Glasgow Police Act for entertaining constables sustained.

XXIII. Appeal by a police constable against a conviction for a contravention of section 93 of the Glasgow Police Act, 1866, by entering a public house during the hours, and not in the exercise of his duty, dismissed, and the conviction sustained. Beggs and Others v. Procurator-Fiscal of Glasgow, Police

Court, 6th Feb. 1878; Couper, iv. p. 9.—Scottish Law Reporter, XV. p. 347.

Publican entertaining his personal friends on his licensed premises where he resided, not guilty of breach of certificate.

XXIV. Appeal.—Held upon an appeal against a conviction for breach of certificate, that the giving of a bona fide gratuitous entertainment by a publican to his friends, with exciseable liquors, after 11 P.M. within his licensed premises, in which he resided, after the same was closed, did not amount to a contravention of the condition of his certificate in Schedule A, No. 2 of the Public Houses Acts Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1862, which declares that he shall not keep open house or permit or suffer any drinking on any part of the premises belonging thereto, or sell or give out therefrom any liquors before 8 o'clock of the morning, or after 11 o'clock of the night, in respect that there was no trafficking in exciseable liquor on the occasion libelled. Smith v. Stirling, High Court, 6th March 1878; Couper, iv. p. 13.-Scottish Law Reporter, xv. p. 420.

Publican not guilty of breach of certificate although persons supplied before 11 P.M. remained on premises 15 minutes after that

hour.

XXV. Appeal.-Held that the fact of a publican having permitted persons, who had been served with liquor in his house before 11 o'clock P.M., when it was closed, to remain for 15 minutes thereafter, did not warrant his being convicted for breach of his certificate, on the ground that he had kept open house after prohibited hours, there being no proof that liquor was supplied or drinking carried on after 11 P.M. Wood v. M'Call, High Court, 14th March 1878; Couper, iv. p. 43.— Scottish Law Reporter, xv. p. 439.

Publican who held a special licence to sell liquors at an auction mart on a Monday morning some distance from his shop, gave liquors on Sunday to carrier to convey to the mart, held not guilty of breach of certificate by so doing.

XXVI. Appeal.-A publican who held a special licence for

the sale of exciseable liquors at an auction mart, 14 miles distant from his public house, gave out on a Sunday such liquors from his public house to a public carrier, that they might be conveyed to the mart, and was thereupon convicted of breach of certificate, and sentenced by the Justices. Held in an appeal that in so doing he had not given out exciseable liquors in the sense of the prohibition in his certificate prohibiting the selling or giving out exciseable liquors on a Sunday, and the conviction and sentence set aside accordingly. Hogarth v. M'Dougall, High Court, 6th Nov. 1878; Couper, iv. p. 128. -Scottish Law Reporter, xvi. p. 70.

Publican's conviction for breach of certificate quashed on account of ambiguity in sentence-Held that a publican gratuitously giving a postboy a glass of whisky, who was driving some of his customers after 11 o'clock at night, was not guilty of breach of certificate.

XXVII. Appeal.-Some customers of a publican left his premises about 10.30 P.M. to go to the railway station, expecting to get a train there to take them home. They found that the train did not stop at their destination, and returning to the public house were admitted, and allowed to remain after 11 o'clock, while a conveyance was being got for them from a neighbouring stable. When the conveyance came to the door the landlady of the public house gave gratuitously to the postboy a glass of whisky before the party started, as the night was cold. No liquor was supplied to the customers after 11 o'clock. The publican having been convicted of breach of certificate in general terms, the conviction quashed on the ground of ambiguity, the Court at the same time intimating that the facts stated did not amount to a breach of certificate, either by keeping open house or selling or giving out liquor after 11 o'clock at night. Boyd v. M'Jannet, High Court, 21st May 1879; Couper, iv. p. 239.—Scottish Law Reporter, xvi. p. 549.

In cases of shebeening not necessary to specify section contravened

Conviction against a publican for shebeening, by selling liquor at a flesher's shop door, quashed, it being held to be an act of hawking. XXVIII. Appeal.-A licensed publican was charged with

'an offence against the laws for the regulation of public houses in Scotland,' in so far as, after 11 o'clock at night, 'he did at or near the door of' a certain flesher's shop, 'unlawfully traffic in spirits, or other exciseable liquors, without having obtained a certificate in that behalf, and such offence is the first offence.' Held that it is not necessary to specify the section of the statute on which such a complaint proceeded; 2nd, that the 17th section of the Public Houses Acts Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1862, anent 'shebeening,' and not the 16th section anent 'hawking,' was the one to which the complaint by its terms manifestly referred; but that, 3rd, the locus at or near to the door of' a flesher's shop was not one in which an offence under the 17th section could be committed; the locus being one, sua natura, incapable of being licensed; and that therefore the libel was irrelevant, and conviction thereon quashed. Hamilton v. Inglis, High Court, 22nd May 1879; Couper, iv. p. 245.-Scottish Law Reporter, xvi. p. 551.

Conviction against publican for permitting prostitutes to assemble sustained-His knowledge of their character presumed.

XXIX. Appeal.-In an appeal by a publican against a conviction for breach of certificate by permitting women of notoriously bad fame to assemble or meet in his public house, observed that it is unnecessary for the prosecutor in order to secure a conviction, either to aver in the complaint or to prove knowledge on the part of the publican of the women's bad character, but on proof of the fact of their being prostitutes, and of notoriety in the place where the public house is situated, the knowledge of the publican may be presumed. Held also that the conviction was in the circumstances of the case warranted, and the appeal dismissed. Maxwell v. Malcolm, High Court, 12th Nov. 1879; Couper, iv. p. 289.-Scottish Law Reporter, xvii. p. 105.

Conviction of publican for permitting prostitutes to assemble quashed -Held that facts proved did not warrant conviction on second charge-Opinion of Judges as to proof required in such cases as to purpose of assembling and notoriety of women.

XXX. Appeal.-A publican charged with breach of certifi

cate by permitting or suffering women of notoriously bad fame to assemble and meet together in his public house, upon a complaint containing two separate charges, on being convicted and sentenced to pay a cumulo fine applicable to both charges, appealed on the ground that the facts found proved were not sufficient in law to warrant a conviction under the second charge. Held that upon the fact stated the second charge had not been established, and as the fine could not be apportioned, the appeal sustained, and the conviction set aside. Opinion per Lord Young, that to support such a charge it must be proved that the assembling or meeting had reference to the bad character of the persons assembling. Opinion also per Lord Adam, that the notoriety of the bad character necessary to establish such a charge is not sufficiently substantiated by being proved to have been a notoriety within the knowledge only of the police of the district within which the public house is situated. Kirton v. Cadenhead, High Court, 13th Oct. 1880; Couper, iv. p. 366.-Scottish Law Reporter, xviii. p. 19.

Conviction against a grocer, whose assistant had given out of shop, after it was shut, two gills of whisky, which was consumed in the assistant's house, quashed.

XXXI. Appeal.-In this case a grocer was convicted of breach of certificate by trafficking in exciseable liquors to be consumed on the premises. About 9 o'clock of an evening two men called at the shop to purchase whisky. Finding it shut, they went into the house of the grocer's assistant, who lived next door, and got him to go into the shop for two gills of whisky. He delivered the whisky to them in his room, and then left. They remained there till they had consumed the whisky. Conviction quashed, held that the case did not come within the scope of section 15 of the Forbes Mackenzie Act, 1853.-Pirie v. Cadenhead, High Court, Feb. 1881.

Conviction for breach of certificate quashed-Alternative charges— Sentence ambiguous.

XXXII. Appeal against a conviction under the Public Houses Acts for breach of certificate, the question was whether the