The Half-Holiday Qnestion.

Taranaki Herald, Volume L, Issue 11934, 7 April 1902, Page 2

The Half-Holiday Qnestion.

CASES BEFORE THE COURT, 1 Several cases for alleged non-observ- J ance of the statutory haif -holiday were » heard by Mr It, L. Stanford, S.M., on Monday morning. William Healey was charged that, on March 13th, he failed to close his shop at and after 1 o'clock, the day being that fixed for the half-holiday by tha local authority. Defendant said that the Tuesday in that week was observed as a half -holiday, and he therefore thought he was entitled to to keep his shop open on the following Thursday. Mr Weston, instructed by the Department of Labour, said it was the intention of the Department- to strictly enforce the law, as the Inspector could not make distinctions lin enforcing the Act. Other storekeepers had to close, and it was ©nly 1 fair that all shopkeepers should observe the law. Counsel admitted that some misapprehension might have existed owing to the Tuesday previous being observed as a half holiday, but that day was not the statutory day, the Mayor simply inviting the burgesses to hojd half- i holiday on account of the Baud contest. He cal'ed, Sergeant Haddrell, Inspector under " The Shop and Shop Assistants Act," who deposed that he found defendant's shop open on Thursday evening, March 13th. Mr Healey said if all shopkeepers were treated alike he could not take objection. Defendant admitted the facts as detailed by the Sergeant. His Worship said no doubt a breach of the Act had been committed. Some shopkeepers had evidently laboured under the mistake that as there was one half holiday in the they could keep open on tb.9 Statutory day. This would not lessen the breach of the law, but it could be taken into account in inflicting a penalty! A fine of ss, with costs was inflicted. Mr Weston said all the Department required was that shopkeepers should play fairly towards each other. , George Boulton was similiarly charged. Defendant said he did have his shop open that evening, but he had been under a misapprehension as the Mayor had invited the shopkeepers io keep the shops lit up on account of visitors being here for the Band Contest. The shop was closed during the afternoon, but he opened the door in the evening. He considered it wan hard to enforce th-± law like this, especially where people lived on the premises like he did. Defendant pleaded guilty in respect to two shops ; aud also to another charge of keeping an assistant at work on the statutory half-holiday. He said he had given his assistant the key to the tobacconist shop, and allo ar ed him to use his discretion. He read an extract frooi a meeting of shopkeepers, suggesting that the shops should be lie up during the band contest week. His Worship fined defendant 5s aod costs on one charge of keeping a shop open ; and al«o 5s and costs for keeping an assistant at work. T. R. Hodder was (harged with keepirg his shop open. He said his shop was open according to tha invitation of the Mayor. He had no intention of doing business, but he obliged one customer and sold him Eome stamps. A fine of 5s and costs was inflicted. Elizabeth Josephs wag similarly charged. Defendant said she closed during the afternoon, and opened in the evening. Fined ss, with costs Margaret Ann Clarke was similtrly charged. Fined ss, with costs. . Charlotte Retfoid was similarly charged. Defendant said she lived on the pre mises, and the previous Inspector had told her that she might sell newspapers She considered it was hard that a person could not sell an evening paper or a stamp to oblige customers. A fine of ss, with costs.was inflicted. The solicitor's co3ts, £2 2s, was ordered to be divided among all the defendant?. Besides each defendant had to pay 7s Couit costs.