THE SHOPS ACT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5282, 12 June 1895, Page 3

THE SHOPS ACT.

SUPREME COURT DECISION. [Per Pjiess Association.] WELLINGTON, June 12. Judge Richmond delivered judgment this morning in the appeal against a conviction, from Greytown, under the Shop 3 and ShoD Assistants Act. There were three objection^ the -first being that " January next " must be taken to mean January, 1696. Hia Honor held that it was plain that such an interpretation violates the ordinary rules of grammatical construction. Prima facie every instrument apeokd from its date or time of execution. Authorities had been quoted in favour of the construction sought to be applied, but one of them, Richards v. M'Bride, waß a distinct, authority against those who quoted it. The other case, Wood v. Eiley, bad no real bearing on the present case. Hib Honor said he had, therefore, no hesitation in overuling the objection. The next ob-

jeetion was that in the Court below the Magistrate admitted the Gazette of Jan. 28, 1895, containing a notification by tbe Minuter of Labour that Saturday had been appointed the half- holiday for Greytown, that the provisions regarding the production of the Gazette did not . apply, to an isolated borough like Greytown, but only to grouped municipalities .where the Minister appoints dayß. This objection would be

sufficiency of the appointment of the day at a special meeting of the Borough Council on Jan. 7, it being urged that the meeting was not duly advertised in the manner prescribed by the Shops Act. After going exhaustively into the circumstances attending tbe convening of the meeting,

his . Honor said he must hold that it was insufficiently advertised. The advertisement of Jan. 3 was too late, and the previous advertisements were premature, because at the time they were inserted the Act had not come into operation. The omission wbb a fatal one, and made the appointment of Saturday aB the holiday in Greytown invalid. The conviction must be quashed. No costs were allowed.