SUNDAY SHOWS

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 80, 1 October 1931, Page 14

SUNDAY SHOWS

RATIONALISTS FINED

FAILURE OF APPEAL

(By Telegraph.-rPresß Association.) AUCKLAND, 30th September. Further prosecutions for holding entertainments on Sunday without the consent of the Auckland City Council were "brought by the council before Mr. M'Keen, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court to-day. . . Three charges were preferred against the New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Rationalism, Inc. Mr. Butler appeared for the City Council, and Mr. ODea for defendant, the organisation pleading guilty to the three informations., , [\ Mr. Butler said entertainments were conducted on three consecutive Sunday evenings following the last prosecution, despite the fact- that ; no permit bad been applied for. Mr. ODea said defendants were pleading guilty to save trouble and expense. The association only wanted'to obtain the : opinion of the Supreme Court concerning the legality or otherwise of the' proceedings in the theatre. Now that its appeal against the Magistrate's decision had failed, the association would cease to promote Sunday night entertainments. 1 The Magistrate said there was very little reason for not imposing the full penalty in each case. . However^ he would accept, counsel's assurance that the "entertainments would definitely cease,- and also the explanation that the association continued to hold entertainments as it thought, there were some prospects of winning its appeal. A fine of &5, with costs £1 11s, was imposed on each of.the three charges. A similar charge was brought by tho City Council against Stirling Rogers, in respect of the Civic Winter Garden. Mr. Armstrong appeared for defendant, who pleaded gulty. , , Mr. Butler said Rogers was proprietor of the Civic Winter Garden, which was used as a cabaret and restaurant. On Sunday, 30th August, a full picture programme was presented between 7.30 p.m. and 0.30 pirn. The holder of a Is ticket was entitled .to see the programme and have supper; There were between 80j> and 900 people present. No permission or consent had been given by the council.' Mr. Butler said he was assured that the defendant had given up the idea of holding, any similar functions. Mr. Armstrong said he wanted to dissociate this case from the other cases. The Winter Garden was a restaurant or cafe, and was conducted as'such on every day of the weeic. The defendant was fined £10 and costs, £2 12s 6d.