Definition
In the context of Sunday closing laws and similar regulatory statutes, "keeping open" a shop, store, saloon, or place of business means maintaining a readiness to conduct the establishment's usual trade or business with the public — regardless of whether the physical doors or outer entrances are literally open or closed. The test is functional, not physical: if a proprietor allows or invites general public access for purposes of traffic or commerce on a prohibited day, the premises are "kept open" within the meaning of the law.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Keep open" in ordinary English means to maintain in an accessible or unclosed state — a door kept open, a path kept clear, or an option left available.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): To keep open carries its plain physical sense: not shut, not closed, accessible to entry or passage.
The gap between common and legal meaning is significant. A layperson would conclude that a shop with locked front doors is not "kept open." Courts applying Sunday law statutes rejected this reasoning entirely. The legal test looks past physical closure to functional availability: if business is being transacted and customers are being served — even through a back entrance or by private arrangement — the statute is violated. Physical closure is insufficient to satisfy the law's intent.
Common Confusion
"Keeping open" should not be confused with mere physical openness of a premises. A building that is unlocked but not conducting business is not "kept open" in the statutory sense. Conversely, a building with closed and bolted doors may still be "kept open" if the proprietor is actively receiving customers for trade. The term is a term of commercial operation, not architectural description.
Why It Matters in Research
This term appears almost exclusively in the context of nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Sunday closing law cases (also called Sabbatarian legislation or blue laws). Researchers working in that area need to understand that courts consistently construed "keeping open" functionally rather than literally, which produced a body of case law about what constitutes "carrying on business" rather than about physical access.
The historical case law cited in both Black's and Bouvier's — 11 Gray 308 (Massachusetts) and 16 Mich. 472 — reflects mid-to-late nineteenth-century American jurisprudence on this point. Researchers pulling primary sources in this area should expect heavy reliance on state-level decisions, as Sunday closing law enforcement was almost entirely a matter of state and municipal law.
Because blue laws have been repealed, amended, or rendered practically dormant in most American jurisdictions, "keeping open" as a formal legal term of art has largely fallen out of active use. Modern researchers are most likely to encounter it when working with historical commercial regulation materials, labor history archives, or constitutional challenges to Sunday laws. The term does not carry forward into modern commercial law with any specialized meaning.
Trap for historical researchers: earlier digests and encyclopedias indexed these cases under "Sunday laws," "Sabbath breaking," or "Lord's Day" — not under "keeping open" as a standalone concept. Cross-referencing those headings is essential to finding the full body of relevant authority.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's and Bouvier's are in full agreement on the substance. Both cite the same two cases for the same proposition: general access to a shop for purposes of traffic violates a Sunday closing statute even if outer entrances are physically closed. Black's adds the articulation of the functional test — "a readiness to carry on the usual business" — which is the more useful formulation for understanding the doctrine.
Neither dictionary contextualizes the term beyond the Sunday law setting, and neither addresses what degree of commercial activity is required to cross the threshold from mere presence on premises to "keeping open." The case law itself (particularly the Michigan authority) does more analytical work than the dictionary entries suggest. Researchers should not treat the dictionary entries as exhaustive statements of the doctrine.
Both sources predate the large-scale repeal of blue laws and reflect an era in which Sunday closing enforcement was a live and frequently litigated issue. The entries should be read as snapshots of mid-to-late nineteenth-century American statutory interpretation, not as statements of current law.
Jurisdictional Note
"Keeping open" as a legal standard was defined state by state through local Sunday closing statutes, and the operative definition varied with statutory language. Massachusetts and Michigan courts reached compatible conclusions, but researchers should not assume uniformity. Some jurisdictions required proof of actual sales; others found a violation upon mere readiness to transact. Always locate the controlling state statute and its judicial gloss.