GARDENING ON SUNDAY.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 11, 14 January 1929, Page 10

GARDENING ON SUNDAY.

CHINESE PROSECUTED.

NO EXEMPTION ALLOWED.

MAGISTRATE'S DECISION.

An important devision was given at the Onehunga Police Court this morning by Mr. F. H. Levien, S.M., on a case presented last month, when Sun Quonj; Sang was charged with working as a market gardener on a Sunday within view of Pilkington Road, Pan mure, a public place.

Mr. Leary. counsel for the Chinese, had contended that in view of the public demand for vegetables of the perishable class mentioned—cabbages, cauliflowers, lettuce and peas—the work of preparing them should be regarded as a necessity, and this was supported by the auctioneers, who gave evidence that actual selling commenced at five o'clock on Monday morning. The magistrate stated that there was no evidence to show that this early demand had not been reasonably met, or had necessitated any extensive Sunday work in contravention of the statute, while even if this demand rould not be reasonably met that alone would not make the work a necessity.

A "necessity," in statutes dealing with Sunday observance, had been defined as "not a physical absolute necessity, but a moral fitness and propriety of the thing done under the circumstances of the particular case. It is not sufficient that it is more convenient or profitable to do it. then than it would be to defer or omit it."

In his opinion, said the magistrate, the appeal that market gardening should be deemed a vrork of necessity was based entirely on commercial grounds, i.e., upon the desire to add a few hundred sacks of vegetables to the Monday morning sales. Deterioration or loss of the goods would not make their preparation a necessity, as this was already adjusted economically in the case of such things as fish, fruit and ice cream. Means had been adopted for preserving them. When the Legislature first brought in the enactments regarding Sunday observance it was Puritan in its thoroughness, and various modifications had since been effected from time to time, both in England and the Dominions. No move, however, had been made in the direction of removing the restrictions on gardening, and he aesumed that this was owing to the virtual impossibility of distinguishing ordinary gardening operations from the mere preparing of vegetables for sale. The magistrate fined defendants 20/ and costs 10/, and refused a'request that he should make the fine over £5 to allow of an appeal.