SHOP HOURS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIII, Issue 10595, 2 March 1895, Page 4

SHOP HOURS.

That the Shop and Shop Assistants Act would come into working without friction was not to be expected. Though not one of the most important of recent social measures, it has certainly been for Parliament one of the most troublesome. In particular, it encountered in the Legislative Council a much more obstinate resistance than was shown to far more important reforms. Even when it passed, it did not go on to the Statute Book in the form proposed or wished by those who drafted it. In its present shape, it is avowedly a compromise ; not the best Act, by any means, that its friends could wish, but the best they could get passed. Most of the trouble now being caused in the North Island is the result of the obstinate determination of the Legislative Council to exempt from the necessity to close all shops in which hired labour is not employed. After a sharp conflict the Council so far gave way as to confine its amendment to shops owned by Europeans or persona of European descent working either solely or with the aid of members of their families under the age of eighteen. At first sight, this would seem to mean clearly that a married shopkeeper could not keep open if assisted by a wife over the age of eighteen. Such was the view taken of the Act by the Stipendiary Magistrate at Dunedin. The friends of compulsory closing were no doubt devoutly thankful for thatgentleman’sdecision, inasmuch as it reduced to a minimum the number of exempted shops. Unluckily for them, however, close on the heels of Mr Carew’s decision came onq from Mr Martin, the Wellington Magistrate. Mr Martin held that a shopkeeper may be considered to carry on a shop “ solely,” even though he is helped by his wife. It is admitted that the Act would prevent a shopkeeper being assisted by daughters over eighteen years of age, but Mr Martin drew a distinction between a wife and a daughter. . We can scarcely wonder that the administrators of the Act should think this distinction arbitrary and fanciful, and that they propose" to- appeal. They could, indeed, scarcely do anything else, seeing that in different parts of the colony the law has been interpreted in diametrically different ways. In Mr Carew’s district a married _ shopkeeper must either dispense with his wife’s help in the shop, or must follow the example of Ms neighbour, and close on the half-holiday. In Mr Martin’s district he can keep open. This being so, the only thing to be done is to get the decision of a higher court on the subject.