SALE OF CIGARETTES AFTER HOURS

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 139, 1 March 1918, Page 4

SALE OF CIGARETTES AFTER HOURS

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT. '■ In the Magistrate's Court' yesterday Mr. S. E. M'Carthy, S.M., delivered a ..reserved judgment of some importance to those. who; sell .smokers' requisites as a side line. , The case was that in which thu Inspector of Labour (Mr. F. V. -Sanderson) proceeded against Harry Davis on two informations under the Slops and Offices Act, 1908: (a) that the defendant, being the'occupier of a shop did on December 13, 1917, sell cigarettes after 8 p.m., suck hour being the closing hour for tobacconist's shops; (b) that the defendant did during the week ending December 15, fail to close his shop on one working day, as required by the Act. ' ' Iμ his judgnient tlio Magistrate said: ''There we're. Before the passing of the Act, andi there are now, certain callings, such,ior...example, as hotolkeepers, fruiterers, gi'ocors, restaurant and marblo barkeepers, etc., v/heroin were sold smokers':requisites in small quantities,, and'-as'sidoi lines.' Thoso carrying on these callings are in no sense tobacconists,' nor are they authorised by the statute, .even by combining with tobacconjsts, to fix the hours of closing applicable to that trade. A clear distinction is drawn between a trader who sells smokers' requisites as side hues, 'and a tobacconist who sells all smokers' requisites, and , in addition usually carries on a ha'irdressing saloon."

After quoting tho law bearing on the subject, His Worship went on to say: "The.defendant's a confectioner and ■'dairyman; who in conjunction therewith runs a marble bar and restaurant. He nannot in any sense be called a tobacconist.' He is to nil intents and purposes a restaurant-keeper. Ho admits that at 8.35 p.m: on tho day alleged he sold iT packet of ■■ yellow-Throe Castles cigarettes to a customer then standing j'l his shop. If the notice had boen intra vires a.n offenco would have been ■committed. ■' Tho < notice is, lioweve: , ', ultra vires, in that" it alleges it has been issued pursuant to a requisition signed by persons who do not carry on the business of tobacconists. The requisition has been signed by vendors of smokers' requisites. Such persons are not necessarily tobacconists, but sell these products as a side line in conjunction with their more ÜBual trades. The selling of cigarettes'cannot reasonably bo said to -be a trade allied to those mainly carried on by the defendant;. It may here bo remarked that there has been no general requisition signed by a majority of all the shopkeepers m tho city of Wellington pursuant to subsection 1 of section 25 of the principal Act. If, then, the present decision is correct, there has-not yel. been fixe'l any hours for the closing of tobaccon ists' shops, and those carrying on other trades who sell smokers' requisites as a side line may sell these requisites during the hours during which they are authorised to carry on their own respective trades." Both informations were dismissed, and His Worship concluded with the following remarks: "Tho legislation relating to the closing of shops and offices seems to have fallen into a, chaotic condition, and requires restating in a simpler form. At present, instead of being a guide, it is a pitfall; instead of, being simple it is complex; its coriuct interpretation is difficult and almost past finding out." At the hearing Mr. ,T. J. M'GratJi appeared for tho defendant. '