THE HALF-HOLIDAY

Feilding Star, Volume 4, Issue 934, 28 October 1926, Page 8

THE HALF-HOLIDAY

ITS NON-OBSERVA N CE. CASES BEFORE THE COURT. Charged at the Court to-day, before Air AA'atson, S.AL, with being the ocupiers of eetrain shops, under the meaning of the Shops and Offices Act, 1921-22, they did fail' to observe the statutory half-holiday as required by section 14, Hon Lee Bros., Long Kee Bros., T. Anderson and K. Aloroney were arraigned before the Court. Joseph Lowden, Inspector oi Factories, conducted the prosecutions. It was set out that on complaints being received that the half-holiday was not being observed and that certain goods were being sold contrary to the restrictions placed on the sale of such goods, investigations had been made with the result of these prosecutions.

T. Anderson was the first accused called, he entering a plea of guilty to the charge. A conviction was entered, and a line of £5 imposed. K. Aloroney, proprietress of the Kosy Nook, who was represented by Air Rower, who also entered a plea of guilty. Counsel said that his client had only recently arrived in New Zealand and had acquired the business. She was ignorant of the goods which she might or might not ,v,nl times when shops vending restricted goods were required to be closed. The cigarettes sold were not part of the stock but a small quantity acquired at retail prices for her customers. Now that she had become aware of her position the cigarettes had been disposed of. A conviction was entered, nut in view of the circumstances accused was fined £2.

Willie AAAih appeared on behaff ol Long Kee Bros, and pleaded guilty 'to the charge preferred. Long Kee Bros, were convicted and fined £5., In the case of Hop Lee Bros., Air Graham put in an appearance, entering; n plea of not guilty. George Davies, Inspector at Palmerston, said he called at Hop Lee Bros., Manchester street, on Tuesday, August 31 last, about 10.30 n.m. and asked to he supplied with a packet of “yellows,” meaning cigarettes, These were produced from the rear of the shop. Jds. Lowden, in giving evidence, said he paid a visit to Hop Lee Bros, shop in Manchester street on the afternoon of Saturday, September 4, at 1.30 and o o’clock. Saturday was the statutory half-holiday and the shop selling as it did tobacco and other restricted goods", should have been closed.

Mr Graham taxed the inspector on his action in failing to supply him with definite information as to which of Hop Lee’s shops the charge refer* reel. Had the charge referred to the premises near Grey street he won cl have gone on' 1 with his defence, hut as it now transpired to he the shop mil' the Square he would have to alter his plea of not guilty to one of guilty. Counsel said that Wong Mung controlled the business under the mime of Hop Lee on the corner of Manchester street and Grey street, while he had a manager in charge of Hop Lee Bi'os. premises near the Square. The shop did not keep cigarettes and if any had been sold Wong Mung, who had control, was unaware of the fact, Wong Mung had arranged with his manager that the stocks remaining he disposed of and no trouble would he experienced in the future.

A conviction was entered and a fine of £5 imposed. In dealing with ilmse cases the Bench remarked that the Inspector pad a large district to attend to and from time to. time prosecutions resulted from investigations. He warned shopkeepers that it devolved on them to observe the Act in every particular. Tli<y sale ’of cigarettes on holidays and at night, after closing hours, was serious and most unfair to the tobacconist in proper business.