MEALS FOR OUTSIDERS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIII, Issue 142, 14 June 1912, Page 2

MEALS FOR OUTSIDERS.

». 2TEED, JscOfT -BE SUPPLIED AtJ IMJOETAN3 , SCFKE&EE COURT '•■-" DEC£Siei?r "■*"'"■■" : Aa important case, cencersing tlje. lia> bility of, private hotel and tjoarding- ° house keepers to provide meals for casual j" callers -was heard at the Supreme Court, + before Mr. Justice Edwards to-day, when _ the Labour Department appealed against y the decision oi Mr-. E.. V. Fraser," SiM., g given in the action Inspector of Factories a v. Mrs. Scberf, proprietress of " Glen- _ alvon." ' ' The original information was laid un= 0 der the Shops and. Offices Acts, XHQB, and ■ a the. Amendment !Act, 1010," Mrs. Scherf v being charged that, being the propriee tress of a restaurant, to wit t alvon," she -did fail- to keep a --wagee s and time book, as provided by the - Amendment Act s 19Jβ.- 3?he™faeis -were 1 agreed on, and the one point 'which - meant the root of the whole case was f that meals were not supplied to any - persons but lodgers or lodgers' guests. - The case was brought as a test case in • order to ascertain whether- establish--2 ments such as "Glenalvon" cama -within ; - the scope of the above mentioned "Acts. s 3ir. Eraser decided that on the facts f "..Glenalv-an"..did-not come, .within .such f definition, and dismissed the information. i At- this morning's proceedings Mr. Sel- ' wyn Mays appeared for the Crown, and r Mr. H. P. Richmond for respgHfint, f . Mr. Mays, in opening the case, stated ' that the object of the • appeal was to 1 obtain a SQpreme/.fepurt judgment upon 3 the point for the guidance of r tij.e • • in • administeriag the 7 Act. The,chief argument he -would rely P upon was that if Glenalvon and similar ' institutions •were not within the scope ' of the 'ATrip.ndment Act, then a very large fc number, of employees in these- institu- ■ tipns throughout the Dominion would b6 1 shut out from all its benefits, while a. • similar number of employees doing pre- ? cisely the same work in licensed hotels ■ anfl restaurants would get the protection ■ the better conditions provided, for by the law. In other words it could not ' have been the intention of the law that 1 a housemaid, say, at the Grand Hotel, r should have her hours of work limited j and duly recorded in a time book whilst ' a housemaid at Glenalvon doing similar 1 w*>rk should ibe outside the His -Honor, without calling upon Mr. 7 Richmond for respondent, said' that whsti? ' ever the policy of the Act might be he 1 was bound -by the plain meaning of the ' words in subsection 2, and, to his mind, ' the-words "general public" meant the , "general public," and he kn.ew that if a ' person from off the street, not a lodger, \ came to Glenalvon and asked to be p!ied with a meal, that person ■\ycmld not "be supplied, and unless su,ch. persons ' were supplied the; establishment, did not [ come within tie meaning of the word 1 "restaurant" as defined by th? Aci. ' His Honor referred to the fact that 1 at the higher class boarding houses only 1 the better class of persons were rfeceived —that -svas, people wbo could _affqrd to ' -pay mQje. "Imagine a man off theryiarf going- into the Glenalvqn o? any snah boardihg : hoiise," remarked His- lierror facetiously, "and saying *WeJl, missus, I want dinner.' ' If "thai state t>i things • prevailed, th«s .'Hgn. Mr." igryce or som"? ' high duke; fat. sit'taog ; alongside €b,e; ttan from, the' 'Wha.rf, of 'the . ,C>hi;rf- JnstiiJe; might' liaT^-.-g:.. bourer on one side and a coal juiaßep ph i t&e-oihep.i'" : " - : " :.'~:,■"■-"-.:. ■ '~-■;'■ \ -Continuing, Big-Honor aaa4jHM.t '%iii t if ays h^4. feiSen the Tor [ appellant-as" far as. -it could'-'be'iajceiii ; feut the position would npt "be altered and. ' the appeal -would therefore, be. dismissed.