Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MURRAY'S BUILDING SALE.

A POLICE COURT SEQUEL. The success of the building sale at present being conducted by Mr J. L. Murray, draper, mercer and clothier, of Queen Street, Masterton, has resulted in a prosecution for employing shop assistants for a longer period in any one day- than allowed by the law. The facts are very simple. On July 13th last, a Saturday night, there was a large attendance at Mr Murray's shop. The closing time arrived. and it was then a case of hustling out customers or making a hurried attempt to supply their numerous wants within legal hours. Mr Murray chose the latter course, with the result that he was duly fined in the Masterton Police Court, yesterday morning. The information laid by the Inspector of Factories, Mr G. Hood, charged John Lincoln Murray, draper, under Section 4 of the Shops and Offices Act, 1904, with employing an assistant for more than eleven iours on the date already mentioned. Mr C. A. Pownall appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Godwin E. A. Hood, Inspector of Factories, stated that he passed the shop on the night in question at a quarter past nine, and the shop was open. Shortly afterwards the assistants commenced to take in the goods, and at half-past nine they left the shop. He asked one of them, W. Kerr, what his name was, and he evaded the question. By Mr Pownall: He was aware that it was the first day of the sale, and that there was a large crowd in the shop. Mr Murray, in his evidence, stated that no one was more particular about observing the Act than he was. He did his utmost to get the customers out of the shop within the time. Mr Pownall contended that the infringement was so slight that it need not have been observed by the Inspector. The case was being defended. on principle. His Worship stated thnt the evidence showed that the sta iI was very busy with the sale. At ihe same time, if a rush of business was anticipated, provision should have been made for it, and so "avoid the crush." A fine of five shillings and costs was imposed.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19070727.2.25

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8496, 27 July 1907, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
368

MURRAY'S BUILDING SALE. Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8496, 27 July 1907, Page 6

MURRAY'S BUILDING SALE. Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8496, 27 July 1907, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert