STREET HAWKERS

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 264, 27 July 1918, Page 7

STREET HAWKERS

; MUST POSSESS LICENSES. ; . ' From what was stated in a case at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, the City Council seems, to be.' encouraging trouble wilh persons who hawk fruit in the streets ot the citv. Alfred James Brutf was charged that oil July 1G- ho . ; hawked fruit in AVillis Street without a .... ' ..Chic.f-lnspwtor Doyle, in reply to Mr. 11. 1?. O'Leary,- who appeared for .defendant; state;! that Urn ft had applied* for a license, hut the police had reported adversely 1 regarding the man. If tho police wero'to report favourably, witness -would be prepared to recommend the "granting of a license. •In the witness-box defendant stated that lie lived in Tarahaki Street., and ■ knew of no reason why-'the police should have' reported unfavourably nboiit him, as he had'never been convicted before. .v.Court in his life. He had to earn a ••• living somehow, and was not able to do hard work. Ho his premises in , Tar.naki Street as a fruit shop, and although the place was not open all day ho made from SDs.'.to ',£2 pel''week out of the place! which he contended was a . phop. On -particular days of the week ha " was- in the habit of serving various shops ..with fruit, and .• was engaged in that work when interviewed by Jlr. Doyle in "Willis Street. . ... ... Air. J. O'Shea, who appeared for the municipal authorities, stated that every nttempt had been made to' get' hawkers to comply with the instructions of the City Inspector.. The presenco of somo of them in' tUs streets of the city, had .proved to be a .nuisance.. The men had winded, together autl. had determined to defy the authorities in the.interests of ■what they,-termed their .rights. 'Bi'liu contended tliat he . had a right to sell fruit in the street without a permit be--1 cause he had a shop. 'There.was a. bylaw which said that shopkeepers could sell goods, in tho street without dntain•jng'a license, llruft had a place whnh •counsel held was really not a shop, but

a storeroom. , ... His Worship held that to comply with the by-law a shopkeeper who also hawked goods- must be in tho position of paying rates. Defendant had not satisfied him tliat he did pav rates for the premises in Tarauaki Street. The difficulty could bo overcome, by defendant getting , a shop which complied with the liy-law. Defendant would be fined 103. with costs 7s. Arising out of the same case, Waker Turner was' charged' with ' ft. similar offence. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Inspector Doyle said the defendant had a permit, riot a license, which limited his 6pnere of action. Defendant produced a .'permit,, which His; Worship held -was- a general, .permit. A permit ,and' a' license,; he said, were liuich the same .thing. The information against 'Turner ,-was dismissed.