HOTEL LIFE.

Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1925, Page 4

HOTEL LIFE.

PKOBLKM I'LAV^OR-MAGISTRATE

O’I! HI EX 01 It lUS AXJ> BOVS IX

corin'. CHRISTCHURCH, Feb I. A problem ]jliiy in two furls was presented before -Mr 11. V. Widdowson, 5.. M.. at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday afternoon. The prologue was played on December 27. 192-1; the first act on .January 17. 1925; and the second act yesterday afternoon. CAST. Xenia York Jack Roberts Betty Coleman All O’Brien Boys Hon ltennie and Girls G. F. Brown Belle Syers Mr \V .). .Sim . . Their Solicitor Mrs Marv Fox . . Hotel Proprietor Mr C. S'. Thomas . . Her Solicitor Mr 11. V. Widdowson . . Magistrate The problem is;- Were the h.)>> and girls” justified in leaving H' c Metropolitan Hotel. Manchester St., ,m the afternoon of .January h •- 1 Hey '•fmtend that they were, but the hotel proprietor contends that they were not. ■md claims from eael, of them the sum of pi 15s, being the amount of one week’s hoard in lieu of notice. On Dcccmher 27. alleges Mrs Fox in her statement of claim, the “hoys and girls” hooked up to stay with her, and on January 17 they entered into possessiim of their room, hut left t|:o same chi.v without j'ivin*' notice, the board they had agreed lo pay was Cl ITjs. ji week. Mr Thomas, in opening, said that the matter should not cause a great deal (it trouble. Miss York wrote to Mrs Fox towards the end of last year, and asked to have rooms engaged tor hersclt and her companions. The manager ol the hotel replied that lie would be able to book the rooms re.-pnred, and Miss York took possession of her room on January 17. Then, without any explanation. Miss York and her comply,ions left. The party hinted that tlie standard of comfort was not "nut was expected. John William Fox, who manages the hotel for Ids mother, gave the details of the looking of the rooms. Ihe party left without explanation. To Mr Sim: There was no ill-feeling about the matter and in fact the defendant Brown had told him that the accommodation was quite good lor the tariff, hut he and his friends had been used to something hotter. Witness thought that the party had entered into a. contract with him to stay jji, the hotel for a week. In fact he thought that they would stay tor three weeks. Mr Sim; Why don’t you sue for Jiree weeks’ notice then?—Well. | only want compensation for the goods I had to get in over the week-end and also the people whom T had to turn auay. Whom did you turn away X There was a number of them. I can t remember. _ . Give me one name; There was a lady from Kaiapoi whom I had to send home. She often stayed at the hotel. You turned away a faithful hoarder for a- few stray theatricals; 1 I os. Do you know the wardrobe in Mr ■Roberts’’ room ?—Yes.

It is covered with dust and on me top there’s an accumulation of boor bottles and old magazines?—l don’t know about that. Mr Tlmmas: What has all this got to do with Miss York's ease? Mr Sim; It shows the general state of the hotel.

Mr Sim: Miss Coleman says that there were hugs in her lied. Witness—She can’t know because she never slept in it. How about the conking?—W ell the cooking was done by my mother, who lias had more experience than most hotel cooks in Christchurch. Mr Kim submitted that there was no contract for a. week’s board. It. was found hy the boarders that the standard of accommodation was below that which they were accustomed to get for •Tis. In leaving the hotel they merely exercised their legal rights under the circumstances. The hoarders went to the hotel with the honest intention <;f trying it out. Mr Bennie and Miss C l.nmin the first to leave, and .'is. the amount of one day’s board, was accepted from them. That proved that the contract was a daily one. Continuing. Mr Sim said that there were no keys iii the bedroom doors, or the ladies’ bathroom, and these lie considered were a. necessity in an hotel ol the standard which the Metropolitan was expected to be.

Miss York, the first witness for the defence, said that the food for breakfast was unwholesome. It was bacon and eggs, and appeared to have been re-cooked. The coffee was undrinkable. Bho was so disgusted that s! e did not see what happened to the oh ter members of the party. Lunch was dreadful. Her bedroom was onclean. and the first time she saw it she decided not to stay the night. The walls of the wardrobe were so dirty that she c.uild not bang her clothes there. The bathroom door could not be closed. She left because the accommodation was not suitable at 35s a week. Mr Thomas: Are you sure there was no catch on the bathroom door?—Yes, quite, certiun.

Now will you tell his Worship wlmt twice conked food is like?—lt’s not good. Wltal was the trouble with the bacon?-- It was hard. Are you an expert bacon cooker?—

1 have' cooked it. Did you cook it well?- 11. suited imp. Arc you married ? —No. Then you haven’t, had a chance to try your baron mi a husband yet. t suggest that you were suffering from summer sickness or something like thaL when you got to the hotel.—No. I nas quite all right,. Did you have a good trip down from Wellington.—l had a fair trip. Arc you a good sailor S’-—Fairly good.

.Mr fhonias: Your trouble is that you want a Dolls Hoyce for the price ol a Ford. The witness: That is not so. All J wanted was three simple meals—once cooked. Betty Coleman said that she was given: mom 17. hut she changed it because it was s*o dreadful. The plaster on the walls was broken, and the bed was covered with soot. .Mr Sim: What was your chief objection to the room ;-

-My chief objection was the little animals. I found two of them under my pillow. But tile general nunosspliere of the room was repulsive. 'The food was quite unsatisfactory. Before the party went into the hotel they had a consultation outside, because they doubted whether it would lie suitable for them if it was to ho judged by the exterior.

Mr Sim : Was there a key to your bedroom ?—No. What about the bathroom?-—lt was not interesting. Mr Thomas—What about those little fellows under your pillow? What experience have you had with bugs?— I’ve never seen them before or since. L was told that they were hugs, and that was enough for me. Air Thomas: If you saw all these things why didn’t you tell the proprietor?—Have a look at the difference between the size of Airs Fox and myself.

.You were frightened of this big heavy-weight, Mrs Fox?—Yes. I was. Being an actress, you must he accustomed to dirt?—One can’t choose where one plays, but one can choose where one lives! You don’t complain to managers about dirty threatres?—No. because I want to keep my job. Jack Roberts said that bis room was thoroughly dirty. There were holes in the walls, and on the wardrobe were dirt and empty beer bottles. The fireplace was filled with the caps of beerbottles. The food wait bad and the standard, was far below that of other 35s houses that witness had stayed in. Ron. Bennie said changed rooms with Aliss Coleman because- the room she got first was too dirty for her. The bedclothes j.n both rooms were covered with soot. He was called into Miss Coleman’s room and found two

insects crawling over the pillow. The steak which he-lmd for breakfast was too hard to 'cut. The eggs were catable, that was all. "At lunch the coal he had placed before him loosed »ad, and the cabbage was all mushed up. He saw .Mrs Fox and told her that ho and -Miss Coleman intended to len\c. He asked what was owing tor a Unj, and Mrs Fox replied os. He !'■> d j- I for himself and Miss Coleman and U'O went away. ~ ■ , i,,, George Brown, m describing tla breakfast, said that the hnco.t «’ns fat, the eggs eatable, and the L . • like singed bread. 'J he e° r » ’ J lunch was black and ho « W and cream seemed to li.uc “sploshed” on the plate. He was far below the standard ol othcl -Vis houses he had been in. ,3 °M Thomas: Are all your company ' . . , * One woulu of ..oblefolk from what' you demand? —AVc demand noI n<r but cleanliness. Filter on witness said that his s o.n •u-h was as hard as iron, but he cold ; |IIL oat the food that was placed before- him. . ~ , p i?ol,— Miss Belle Syers, wile ol Ju< >'■ . c-ls, said that her room was dusty ami

"Tesliu llardie. City Inspector, -aid that he had inspected the MeW - tan Hotel about three weeks ago . id had passed it as fit for a common lodging house license. Co.npa.ed with other houses charging 3os n aeek was of a lower standard. T„ Mr Thomas : The house just passed his inspection. , , , Mr Sim ; What type ol person aould von ' expect to say there?- A rough such as the defendants ’-—Certainly ll °Tlu' case was then adjourned till this morning, when the Magistrate wijl inspect the hotel. MAGISTRATE INSPECTS PREMISES

,IUDGMEXT FOR I’LAIXTIFF. CUBISTCHUBCH, February o. the ease in which .Mrs Fox, proprietress of the Metropolitan Hotel, sued some members of “'The O’Brien Girl” Theatrical Company for a. week’s board, which occupied the attention ol Mr H. Y. Widdowson, K.M., at the Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday, was renewed yesterday. Mr Thomas appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Sim for the defend|ants. When the case was resumed yesterday morning. Mr Thomas called Mrs Mary Fox, proprietress of the Metropolitan Hotel, who said the 10s had been left on the office desk. To Mr Sim: Bennie and Miss Coleman left the IDs there. Witness’s son saw them go into the 'I roeadero and he rang them up and said he expected a week's board from them. Witness did not tell the theatricals the tarilf was "s per day. tithe never lelt keys in the doors as they had been taken away formerly by theatricals. She never left soap in the bedrooms. The rooms were not always cleaned up by half past nine as they had been that morning.

To Mr Thomas: If the people had told them they were going to another hotel she would certainly ban- asked them for a week’s board.

Frank S. Rainsbottom, clerk in the employ of Baliantyno and Co., said he had stayed at' the hotel for the past eight years. The food was good and wholesome and not overcooked. Witness did not know the number ol his room, which was not papered. Mr Thomas: It isn’t safe to wander in a house where there are no keys. To Mr Sim ; He did not know the room which Huberts occupied and would be surprised lo bear there weie beer Ditties and dust in tlie room. He might lit* the “star hoardei. Joan Mills, furniture worker, said the house was kept .spotless. TUI'ocd was good--the ordinary run of boardinghouse food, lie had never bad meat twice loo.Ad. He paid Tis petweek .

To Air Sim: 11 is room was No 7 mi the first Hat. He had been in other rooms in the house.'and they uerc all right from his observations. No (i at the Metropolitan was just as g0,,:l as one could ■.'ct at the IVopb-',-Pahcc lor two guineas. To the Magistrate: lie had never had occasion to complain. He put the lailt on the bathroom door, lie did not oat bacon, hut had eggs- every morning and they were all right. To Air Thomas: He had never heard of .iti.g.s being in the house. Pat.irk John M’Cormick. motor me-hauic, said -lie had lived in the bouse under three proprietors for the last eleven years. He left two and a half months ago. The place was in every way up to date. To Air Sim: He now htul a place of his own. His room was No 9, hut he had been in other rooms. Fie would not object to being in a room where there were match strikes all over the walls. Recalled by the Magistrate. Mr liamslottom said he had never seen anything to indicate that there were hugs in the house. Mr Sim said lie wished to make the observation that the clean-up for the Magistrate's inspection that morning could have been perfectly stage-man-aged. The house would he in a very different condition from what the theatricals found it on their arrival that Saturday morning. Inspector ifardie had stated that the place “just passed.’’ It was till very well for plaintiffs to call two or three, “star" hoarders. Airs Fox had accepted the money and let the people go and thereby wnivered her claim.

AH* Thomas submitted that unless the •defence could show that it was not a fit place to live in then plaintiff was entitled to a week’s hoard. Talking about- stage managing, if the All Blacks showed anything like the combination demonstrated by the theatrical witnesses on Tuesday, then it was tyi wonder they had such a successful tour. The story about the hugs had been put up to* frighten plaintill out ol C ourt. His friend had the idea that lie could buy champagne for iho price ol beer. (';>’.ii:s"l cm tended that the depositing of the 10s on the table was not a settlement.

The Aragistrntc said that the point to decide was whether the defendants were entitled to leave at the end of a day or at the end of a week. He must lioid that they were liable for a week. With regard to the two who paid ss, they would perhaps have been in a different position from the other five, but they had told Airs Fox a lie in that they wore going to stay with their friends. ' He would hold that they were liable for a week's hoard. As to the question as to whether circumstances compelled them to leave, the Magistrate said that if a person who had been used to a high-class house chose to go to a cheaper house, he had no right to complain if lie receievd treatment in accordance with the taiiff. Personally speaking, ho might have taken the same view as tnc theatricals, regarding the outward appearance of the hotel. They had gone inside, and the trouble had ensued. Defendants had complained bitterly of the state of the rooms and the food. Regarding the food he thought, speaking generally, that the company was composed of people who expected something of a

higher standard than that provided by the house. He thought that they had painted the picture as luridly as they possibly could. They were prejudiced against the house, but had made no conipjln.i-nt to anybody there. The rooms appeared to satisfy other people. Defendants did not take, into consideration the fact, that they arrived early ill the morning. Ho <1 id not think that the circumstances entitled defendants to leave in the manner they did. Willi regard to tlie hugs, he must hold that it had not been proved that there were bugs in the plate. With an open window, insects might be expected to fly in. Bugs were insects, but insects might not bo bugs. Judgment was given for plaintiff in each ease for the amount claimed, together with costs £3, witness’s expenses £2 18s and solicitor’s fee £1 Gs.