“WORSE THAN TWO-UP"

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12458, 28 May 1926, Page 3

“WORSE THAN TWO-UP"

CONFECTIONERS ENTER PROTEST ROLL DOWN OR TAKE DOWN? COUNCIL SYMPATHETIC A protest agaifist the roll dows parlours was voiced before the Oity Council last evening by a deputation representing 350 retail confectioners in the city. A councillor described them as “take downs.” Mr Clewer claimed that the competition was quite unfair, and said the best box of chocolates in the parlour was worth about Bs, and as therp were 21 tables in the place £2 2s was secured for the 8s in a 2s pool. Proportionately the value of the chocolates was reduced with the reduction in the pool money, till for a 3d pool a box ©f sweets costing Is was given away. The roll down was the biggest gamble in the world. Mr Poole said the parlours were exciting complaints through being foil of undesirables—both men and women. “I know of people,” he said, “who have secured their Saturday’s meat from the butcher ‘on tick,* and sell it to someone else in order to secure money for the roll down.” In reply to Councillor Huggins, Mr Clewer said some of the boxes were advertised to contain 81b of chocolates, and when opened were found to contain 21b of cheap chocolates. Councillor McKeen: To what extent are the confectioners affected ? WpRSE THAN TWO-UP Mr Clewer: I think they take from £ISOO to £2OOO per week. Some of the smaller men say that they are affected to the extent of £ls, £lO, and £8 per week. Councillor R. A. Wright: Is it worse than two up? Mr Clewer: Many times worse. The Mayor (Mr C. J. B. Norwood, in replying, said that anything that could protect the legitimate trade of the people would receive consideration. The powers of the council, however, were limited ; and there would be difficulty in retrieving those licenses already issued. He was taking the matter to the Commissioner of Police, to find just how far the council could help. The council was sympathetic. Councillor H. D. Bennett moved that the council express its appreciation of the steps that were being taken by the Mayor to see what steps could be taken to stop the roll downs. Councillor M. F. Luckie seconded, and said that it was a question of whether those who already possessed permits would be allowed to let the term run out. The games had been tolerated at the Winter Show and at the Exhibition, for the purpose of drawing the crowd, but there was nothing in the principle to justify the existence of the parlours. HEALTH ASPECT Councillors R. A. Wright and J. Aston agreed that the roll downs did not comprise legitimate business. The latter thought the conditions in the roll down parlours were so offensive to the health of the people that the health committee would be justified in taking action. Councillor Huggins said the licenses could be cancelled if they had been secured under misrepresentation. Councillor R. McKeen preferred to call the parlours “take downs” rather than roll downs. Councillor Meadowcroft wished to follow the lead of Petone, and suspend the licenses. Councillor Luckie: You can’t do that. Councillor J. Burns said in Dunedin he had seen old people who would ordinarily “not spend a hob/fighting for a place in the roll ups.” The council endorsed the actions of the Mayo*.