SOLVED.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1400, 28 March 1912, Page 2

SOLVED.

THAT CHINESE PUZZLETHE GROCER-FRUITERER. MUST OBSERVE HALF-HOLIDAY. Yesterday morning, in the Magistrate's Court, Mr. W. G. liiddell, S.M., delivered judgment in the eases in which a Chinese shopkeeper, named Cluing Wall, was charged with employing nn assistant after one o'clock on the afternoon of Wednesday, March 13; ami also, with failing to close his shop oil the same afternoon. At tlio hearing of the cases Mr. Le Cren, who represented the Department, said that the defendant was the keeper of a shop (registered as a whole) in which were sold groceries, fruit, and vegetables. The premises were run as 0110 shop during the hulk of the week, and tlio assistant was employed as a general store hand, not as a server of fruit and vegetables only. On Wednesdays ■« partition was let down, and the shop thus divided, and whilo the side containing the groceries was closed, the portion in which the fruit and vegetables were stocked was kept open for business. The defendant could nut, for any purpose, cut oil part of it and call it another shop. On the registration form defendant had signed himself as a grocer and fruiterer. The defendant was represented by Mr. A. L. Herdman, who asked the Court to treat the case as a test. It was an interesting one, and a most important one to tho'-e traders, lie submitted that the defendant had strictly complied with the law. On Wednesday afternoons, in order to comply with the Act, defendant let down a shutter, and thereby divided his shop. It was not a matter of whether defendant had registered the shop or not. The facts were perfectly simple. It, would bo a stretching of the Act if this man were prevented from selling goods which were expressly authorised. Points of Law. His Worship said that according to Section 11 of the Shops and Offices Act, 1903, all shops must be closed on one working day of each week, at one o'clock in the afternoon, for tlio remainder of the day. Under Section IS the provisions of Section 11 were made subject to exceptions and modifications, providing that, in the case of any shop wherein is exclusively carried oil any one, or more, of the businesses of a fishmonger, a fruiterer, etc., tho occupier shall not be required to close his shop on any working day. A shop, according to Section 1, was a building in which goods were kept, exposed, or offered for sale, or in which any part of tho business of tile shop was conducted, and under Section -13 every shop was required to be registered with tlio Inspector of Factories by tho occupier, and in the name of one person as occupier. The Magistrate's Decision. His Worship then proceeded to his ruling. "In defendant's application to liavo his shop registered lie had stated that he was carrying on the trade of a grocer and fruiterer. His act in partitioning oIV that portion of the shop which contained groceries as well as fruit on the Wednesday afternoon," said 31r. Kiddell, "resulted in the closing of part of his shop, and the keeping of the remaining part open. It lias been held in a Masterton case that a partition erected to separate groceries from fruit was not a sufficient division. If defendant hnd registered his shop as two premises, I am inclined to think that he would have been within his rights, and would not have infringed any section of tho Act, but, having registered only one shop, which contains goods that do not come within the exceptions mentioned in Section IS, I think he has failed to comply with the lawill only closing part. Section 20 of the Act of 1908 says that a shop shall bo deemed not to be closed within the meaning of the Act if it is not locked, or otherwise effectually closed against the admission of the public, or if the occupier, or his assistant, are engaged in canvassing for orders, or delivering goods to customers. A shop, I take it, means a registered shop within tho meaning of tho Act; and, if only part of it is closed, then tho occupier does not comply with the statute."

On the first charge the defendant was lined .81, and was ordered. to pay tho interpreter's Us (10s. (id.), and the Court costs (7b.). Respecting: the second charge lie was required to pay the Court costs (75.).