DANCING GIRLS AT HOKITIKA, A CURIOUS CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 3122, 20 February 1873, Page 2

DANCING GIRLS AT HOKITIKA, A CURIOUS CASE.

At the Hokitika Resident Magistrate’s Court, on February 10th, one Montague Jackson, a publican, claimed damages of L100 of F. W. Hine, for having wrongfully enticed and procured one Edith Montte, unlawfully, and without the consent, and against the will of plaintiff, to depart from the service of plaintiff. Mr South was for plaintiff, and Mr Parkiss for defendant.

The following portions of the plaintiff’s evidence (taken from the West Coast Times) show the nature of the case :

Montague Jackson deposed that he is an hotel keeper, and holds a publican’s license. Know defendant, who is also a publican. Witness entered into an agreement with Edith Montte to serve him for three months. The profit of the girls to me arises out of the drinks taken after every dance, one shilling each time. A girl would dance from fifteen to twenty dances every night. The girls were not allowed to drink anything but lemonade or lemon syrup. The profit on each girl would be L1 per day, or more. By Mr Purkiss: The girl arrived on Friday, January 31, and left on the following Monday. She first spoke of leaving on the Monday morning. She said that my house was not respectable. I said that if my house was not respectable she was going to a worse. I knew where she was going to, because I had been told on the previous evening that she had been to Hint’s. She did say that she had seen a man sitting on a young lady’s knee, but then they were engaged to be married. She (Edith Montte) then packed up her things, and I told her I would make her suffer. She was with me three nights. I am licensed to keep open until 12 o’clock at night, but I am open sometimes later. You’ve been there often enough and ought to know. I have been open until four o’clock on occasions. The girls can please themselves whether they sit up or not. I have never dismissed a girl for refusing to sit up. During the three nights that Miss Montte was with me she sat up. I told her on the Friday night that she must be tired, and ought to go to bed, but she preferred stopping up. One girl was intoxicated on the Saturday night, and I discharged her both for drunkenness and for using abusive language. I do not know how she got drunk Intoxicating drink was not served to the girls, but it was possible for them to get it from those they drank with. We were up until three o’clock on that Sunday morning. The girls were up too. I don’t know why they stopped up. They were not required to do so. I never saw any of the girls sitting on men’s knees. I discharged the girl that was intoxicated, so that she should not corrupt the morals of the others. It has occasionally happened that one or two of the girls have got drunk. People trying to entice them away give them drink, and then a very little in the evening intoxicates them. It is not the drink they get in the house that intoxicates them, but what is given them out of doors. I did not caution the girls to be on their good behaviour so as to create a good impression with the new arrivals. My girls always behave themselves,

else they have to leave. Games have been played in my house, such as cribbage, euchre, &c. The girl offered me her passage money. Afterwards, I took the L5 15s. and gave her a receipt for it. I did not take the passage money in full satisfaction. Hine said to me that I ought to get the passage money. I consider that I get twelve shillings profit out of fifteen shillings worth of drinks. I never reckoned what money was taken after 12 o’clock at night. Gertrude Montte deposed that she went into the service of plaintiff with her sister Edith. She was not aware of any of the circumstances of her sister entering defendant's service. She was not there now. She went last Monday, but had left since. Did not know who enticed her sister from plaintiff. Did not know that Hine had offered her 25s per week.--By Mr Purkiss : I was not allowed to go to bed at 12 o’clock. I have seen my sister prevented by Mr Jackson from going to bed at 12 o’clock. I had no objection whatever to Mr and Mrs Jackson. They behaved very kindly to me, but I did not like the manner in which the girls behaved. They jumped on the knees of men, and sat beside them. These men struck matches on the soles of the girls' boots, and other things of the kind. I did not think it a house fit to stay in on account of these things. I saw a black man being kissed by one of the girls. I don’t know that they were going to be married. I don’t think so. I only stopped one day after my sister. I might have stopped, only that when I was going to bed on the Monday night, Mr Jackson offered to walk with me the next day. His Worship said that the agreement subsequently signed seemed to him to be onesided, but that point had not been raised for the defence. It seemed, however, very clear that defendant had nothing to do with the agreement at all. He came with the matter, not forcing himself into it, but because he had engaged the girl, who had come to him soliciting employment, saying that she had left Jackson. With reference to the engagement of the girl with Jackson, his Worship considered, without attempting to preach morality, that any decent women would be quite right in leaving the house. If the evidence given by the girl who was called as a witness was true, and it had been brought before him when the licence was applied for, he certainly should not have granted it. Judgment for defendant, with L5 19s costs, to be paid by plaintiff.