THEATRE RESTRICTIONS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17211, 12 July 1919, Page 10

THEATRE RESTRICTIONS

BREACHES OF RECENT LAW. FURTHER PROSECUTIONS. ONE MANAGER FINED £15. Throe proprietors of picture theatres were charged before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., at the Police Court yesterday with failing to close their theatres in accordance with section 23 of the Public Health Act. ] Robert Louis Cleland, manager cf the ( National Picture Theatre, was charged with opening the theatre before 2 p.m. on June 28. . Defendant said that on June 27 he was ; fined for a similar offence, but as the following day was a Saturday he thought the police womd not prosecute him lor finishing the week out. the hours prescribed in the Act had been observed since , then. Defendant was convicted and ordered to pay 9s costs. , Sub-Inspector Wohimann intimated that the Public Health Department would not prosecute theatre proprietors if they opened their theatres half an hour before I tho times stipulated in order to admit the public, provided tho show did not start till the time laid down. j Mrs. Dominica Hay ward (Mr. Ostler) . was charged that on June 19 she opened i the Grand Theatre before 2 p.m. Mr. ■ Ostler said they all knew the Act was i rushed through Parliament without notice ■ being given to those whom it most coni cerned. It was not enforced till Easter i time. Then all the theatres closed except I one, and when the proprietors of other • theatres asked that action should be taken by the police against this one particular theatre it was not done. In consequence all the theatres opened at the usual time, 11 a.m. His client was one of the last 1 to open. On June 27 the proprietor of the Grand Theatre was fined, and he had observed the law ever since. He considered that the charge for an offence on June 19 should not now be brought, and lin the circumstance:i it should bo withI drawn. ' i Tho magistrate entered a conviction and ! discharged defendant j Arthur Ernest toe, manager of Everybody's Theatre, was charged with opening his theatre before 2 p.m. on June 28, and between 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. on July 1, 3 and 5. Sub-Inspector Wohimann said de- ' fendant was also fined on June 27, and he had defied tho law since then. He had been the chief cause of the trouble with the other picture theatres, and he had told the police he would not close for anvbedy. Not only had he broken the law, but he bad encouraged others to do so. He had inserted advertisements in newspapers which had nearlv brought a more serious charge against him. He did not want to >c hard on Mr. Cc-e it he would promise Ito observe the law in future. ( Defendant said it was a matter of sheer i •necessity with him. and he did not keep ; , open out of any disrespect to the Court ' All the ether picture theatres were owned I by a corporation. j The Magistrate: There is a saying that ■ i necessity knows no law, but this Court I cannot help you in that respect. You do not suggest that I should allow you to break the law because your pocket" is not as strong as that of others? Defendant: I only committed a technical j breach. I opened at six o'clock instead I iof seven oclock, but I closed down at four ; o clock instead of five o'clock. That was i in order that I could keep mv staff emi plcyed and meet mv obligations ! The Magistrate : The Legislature has fixed one hour and yon have fixed another . ou .]' a « better take some other walk in | .life if the tiieatre does not pay you I Defendant said he had never had'instice. J The Magistrate : Well, von get it now. The first charge will be dismissed and you will be fined £5 on each of the three I renaming chirm There are other remeIn J >™ t e ~'' ird the law. you know. I Defendant: I am very sorry*, sir. but |o\htwl dUe 10^ — fc