BREACH OF GROCERS’ AWARD

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3624, 9 April 1927, Page 3

BREACH OF GROCERS’ AWARD

SEASIDE STOREKEEPER CHARGED. MAXIMUM FINE IMPOSED. At yesterday’s sitting of the local S.M. Court, before Mi - . J. L. Stout, S.M., G. A. Perreau was charged by the Inspector of Awards with failing to close his grocer’s store at the Manawatu Heads when required to do so by law. Three charges were preferred against defendant who pleaded not guilty. Mr. Lowden (Inspector of Awards) conducted the ease for the Department. Coinstable Owen gave evidence as to finding the shop open during the Christmas holidays when required by law to be dosed. Defendant had previously been warned to close his shop on the days mentioned. Cross-examined by defendant, witness said that there were no customers in the shop when he visited it on ’Xmas day hut the shop was open for business and defendant’s parents were behind the counter. Constable Ryan gave evidence as to seeing customers coining from the store with parcels on Neiw Year’s Day. Defendant said that the shop was open for the sale of .refreshments, which was permissible on the days in question. The S.M. said there was an appearance of open defiance of the law. Defendant had been warned by Constable Owen to shut the shop previous to the visit and at the time of the visit, hut this warning had been ignored. Defendant: The shop was not open. The S.M.: A door leading into the shop was open and so the shop was open. Defendant: The door leading into the shop was open to allow* the waitress to procure refreshments for the refreshment room. The S.M.: Well, the waitresses will have to find some other way of bringing in the refreshments. Continuing, he said that at ’Xmas time defendant’s parents were both behind the counter when Constable Owen visited the shop. If the shop was not. open for business what

wore they doing there? The law could not be defied. It was an expensive proceeding to attempt. The shop was governed by the Grocers’ Award, and keeping open on the days mentioned in the charges was a breach of that award. If defendant desired to sell ice cream and refreshments a special room would have to be provided and care taken that customers consumed the refreshments on the premises. When Constable Owen rang up defendant had not sense enough to see that the shop was shut. There was absolutely no excuse for keeping the shop open. It was an attempted evasion of the law. The shop was open as long as the door leading *into it from the refreshment room or any other room was open. Defendant was convicted and fined £5, with costs 10/-, on each charge.