BAR AND BOTTLE STORE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19416, 26 August 1926, Page 12

BAR AND BOTTLE STORE.

DEFINING THE DIFFERENCE. PROBLEM BEFORE MAGISTRATE. [BY TELEGRAPH.—KRESS ASSOCIATION.] ■ . * CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday. ; A .probjem which 'vvill probably affect the licensees "of a . number of hotels in New Zealand was put before Mr. H. P. La wry; S.M., in the Magistrate's Court to-day, wfeti he was asked to settle the question as t<> whether a bottle store in a. hotel is a bar within the moaning of the Licensing Act. - v ' \' George lies, /icensee of the Provincial Hotel, was charged with employing a female person in or about tlje bar of such licensed premises at a time wben the bar was open fpr sale of liquor. Mr. Upham ;said the facts which the police would adduce would be admitted. The position was that the woman in respect of whom ,tho complaint was made was employed in tho bottle store which, he contended, was not a bar within the meaning of the Act, since liquor .was not sold in it for consumption on the premises. It contained no fittings, such as machinery for drawing liquor, and no glasses. Sub-Inspector Mathew held that since liquor was. sold in tho bottle store it was a bar, and that, therefore, as the woman employed in the store was not a registered barmaid, the licensee was contravening the law. In" his evidence lies said there was no particular advantage in employing a woman in the bottle store, and it would make no difference to the trade if he were compelled to dismiss; her'through the decision in the case'being given'against him. •

Mr. Upham said the case was of special importance at the present time, as fresh legislation was now pending in which the distinction should be made clear. If the decision were given in time it could be taken into account;

The magistrate said he would give his decision. as early as possible, reserving judgment in the meantime.