BEEP AND PORK

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 152, 22 March 1919, Page 10

BEEP AND PORK

BUTCHERS' CLOSING TLUIi. An interesting caso was heard in tho Magistrate's Court yesterday by Sir. I l '. V. J'Vazer, S.M., when John Symonds, butcher, of Courtenay Place, was'charged on fivo informations with failing to close his premises in accordance with a requisition duly gazetted. Mi'. It. T. ijoiley, Inspector of Awards, prosecuted, and Mr. It. Kennody appeared for tho defendant.

Mr. Bailey stated that t.ho requisition required butchery businesses to closo at fi p.m., but pork butchers, by reason of the different nature of their business, did notcomo within tho scope of the requisition. In this case the greater part of the business carried on by the defendant was that of an ordinary liutehcr. Defendant was required by law to close his premises each evening at 5 o'clock, with tho exception of the Wednesday half-holiday, when the closing hour was 1 p.m.

ilvidenco was called to show that the Kicatcr portion of defendant's stork comprised l.'ei'f and million. There was very little, pork- killed at Hie. abattoir on his behalf. In evidence, Hi'. Bailey stated tli.il; defendant had told him that it was only on Fridays and Saturdays that lie (M nsidcred lio was a pork butcher.

•Mr. Kennedy submitted Hint the proseuition had failed to prove that tho defendant was a butcher, but Uis Worship was satisfied that a. ease against the defendant had been established. Counsels client was a pork butcher and dealt larnely in pork.

In giving his <lecision. His Worship referred to the definition of "evening:," and slated that a Magistrate in the south had decided that the amendment made in tllo legislation was ineffective. In his opinion the amendment validated all requisitions for 5 o'clock closing, and had put right the defect in the law as determined by Sir Robert titout in his decision in the case Hoiilrisuwlli v. Lightfoot. The defendant appeared to carry on a. combined business, and it was ditlicnlt to classify the two classes. In his opinion (he matter was wovl'hy <>l revved icgisinl'-OJi, The distinction drawn between the two trades appeared illogical and absurd. In .Auckland, by agreement, Ihe system adopted In- coniliined butchers was to put their ordinary meat in the freezer at "> p.in. This was an easy solution of Hi" diilicultv. The defendant had committed a breach, and would be lined ,C 2 and costs lis. y the first charge, and would be ordeicd lo pay coiirl costs (75.) on the other charges. For a similar offence Howard and Tilyard, butchers, Maud Bay, were tilled ,£i! and colli, Tho defendants did not appear, and were unrepresented by counsel.