FISHMONGERS' SHOPS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14528, 20 May 1909, Page 3

FISHMONGERS' SHOPS.

THE MKANIXU OV TflK AW. (WHAT IS A ML"iTO-\BlKlJ» Occasionally, involving a profound knowledge oi natural history find their wily into the City Jroiio.) Court. One ot Ulese Hhii in eviflenca \-cst,ji<luy, when Francis Jooepli Sullivan, fobinonger, Stuart street, waa eliai-gcd with tliut, on iVliiy 12, twine; the occupier cl u shop witliin tlio iiiouiwiiS of -ilie Sltoiu a i K | offices Act, 1808," mid carrying on business in tho combmed <litt.riet of Uuucd'iu, lie did fail to ctec hw ahop aforesaid at the hour o[ 1 o'clock in the altcruoou of tho slatutorjclosing day for tivo reuiaincicr of the day. .Mr Fiticb appiarod for -defendant, wlio p'.Kulcd " .Not guilty." Mr l.el'reii, uispeetor of Factories, eiid that the actual mete were admitted in respect to the liefendanl having wild poultry an.l rabbits during tlw same week as thin offence was alloyed to have- been committed. That, was sufficient to place defendant outsiilo the exemptions. 'Jlie offence was one against section 11 of t.l» Shop and Officea Act, which lixod the half-holiday and tho exceptions. Under sectaon 16 a fohmongcr was not required to close his shop on any working day, but for the purpose of this soction a fishmonger was <Icfiiio.il m a "•liWfiOU whoso busiilCEs is to sell feb or shcllfißb." Neitfier poultry nor rabbits eamo within this definition. For a long time defendant lwd restricted hi-.i business to fish, as defined by tho act, but lately ho had 6onio idea of extending bis business. At first ho (tlto speaker) iiad thought that (his uwe was one of pure- defiance, but tho matter liikl l;ecn oxpkiaed by Mr Finch. Mr SulTix-an was acting upon'legal advice. Mr FJneh said that 3tr SUlivan had boon advised that, ho wtis wkliiu bis rights in exposing rabbito for sale in his shop, aJul this advieo had been confirmed by a recent decision by his Worship. Ho proposed to calle ovideuoe to allow that tho only people who t>oll rabbits, umktonbirds, and poultry were fislimoitgcrs, and only fishmongers. ■Hris was a ude to which were only two exceptions in Dnnedin. In defining a fishmonger's business it would be ridiculous to say tJiat. ho must only sell fish and shellfish. Counsel then advanced tiie confeorioncr'» btcsiueu as a parallel. It would b« absurd to state that a con feet ionor sold nothing but confections, when ovoryone know thoj sold bims, bread, biscuits, and meat pies. Tho Magistrate oausidered that all tlwso confooiiouers' btißinescs combined that of thu baker. Mr Kneh: Woll, if you decide again6t us, your Worship, we won't even bo able to sell muttoJibiids Tho Magistrate: I don't know what a muttoubird is, and I don't suppose th* inspector knows either. Samuel K. Gardham. fishmongej, waa then called. _ Mr Finch: What is a mnttonbird? Is it a bird or a boast of the fieldt'-Witncas: Well, m» sell it. as a bird Replying to counsel, witness said all fishmoncGra in Duuodtn sol<) nibbib. James Kelson gavo e\idcnoe to the effect that rabbits and poultry and nuittonbirds had always been regarded as the stock of a fishmonger. After further aJ-gument, tho Magistrate said ho did not anticipate any difficulty in the mattor, but ho wwld look furthe-r into it. A, .written jHdgmeajl wonW be fortheomiro.