A SALE OF LEMONADE
Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S..M, gave his decision to-day in tho case against Margaret Wardlaw, who was charged witn keeping her shop open on Sunday, the Bth of November, for tho purpose of trading. The defendant has a shop and tea rooms on tho Main road, Northeast Valley, and on the Sunday in question youths were supplied with lemonade, which they drank at the counter. MiLemon, for the defendant, contended that tho refreshments supplied were a work of necessity. His Worship, in giving his decision, said it was claimed that the sale by the defendant was in the same position as the business conducted by a proprietor of tea rooms in view of public places, and that a conviction in this case would condemn tho latter for Sunday trading In his opinion that did not necessarily follow. The social habits of the age had to be considered, and afternoon tea had become such a universal custom that it might well be considered a " necessity" within the relative meaning attached to that expression As to what might be supplied under the guise of "afternoon tea 1 ' was, however, another matter. It had been held in America that the sale of soda water, even by a restaur-ant-keeper, did not come within the exception. It was also to be noted that thr> section of tho Act contained an express prohibition of the business of any " har" Selling soft drinks was the ordinary business of such bar, and a sale on Sunday would be part of the ordinary business. The proviso to the section could not be given such a meaning as to absolutely nullify this express prohibition. It was clear, therefore, that a bar could not sell on Sunday, and he could not see how the sale of the same article in a shop was in a different position. It was no more a work of necessity in one case than in the other. The defendant would be convicted and fined 5s and costs (7s).
Permanent link to this item
SUNDAY TRADING, Evening Star, Issue 15669, 7 December 1914