TENEMENT CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10613, 11 June 1920, Page 3

TENEMENT CASE

conductofFhouse ;; NEIGHBOURS “ COMPL ArN""OF SINGING A tenement case in. which Arthur G. Spiers and Alice Spiers sought to claim Waripori Howe, Occupied the attention-^!-AlnsE; Page, in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. ■ - ■"

Mr T. H. Hislop appeared’for plaintiffs and Mr W. fcf. ‘AieHislT for the .do’-; ;

fendant. Counsel for the'plaintiff‘ Mbted''tnbfc’ there were two’ grounds’ 'by' which “he" hoped to secure an ejectment order. The house was recently bought by plaintiff, who had np home, and secondly that the house was not properly conducted, as the Howe’s frequently held parties until late hours, thereby annoying the neighbours. Arthur G. Spiers, owner of-the property at No. 91, Waripori street, said that on his behalf notice was given defendant to quit the premises. Plaintiff was a returned soldier, and after serving for four years and nine months, on returning; he was unable 1 to get a house. He was a steward on the Wahino, ' and together with his wife, whom he brought out from England, was living in a room with friends in Aro street. Witness spent oao night a week at home. •

His wife, Alice Spiers, also gave evidence, and said that they hail been in Wellington nine months and wanted a house of their own. "MANY COMPLAINTS.”

Sergeant Cruickshanks, of the South Wellington station, called as a witness for the plaintiff, • said that he knew No. 91, W arippri street, the house in question. Ho;had received manv complaints about the conduct of the house, but although he had the house, under observation, he had not visited it. He had watched the house from the street on many occasions and the result of his observations was that he would describe the inmates as noisy. Singing and dancing went on up to twelve and on© o f clock 'in the morning. Ho had noticed many men and women entering and leaving the' house, and on coming away many of them were under the influence of liquor. They were inclined to fight, and on one occasion witness and a constable had to interfere "to prevent a fight. The house was’ a rowdy and noisy one, and its character was objectionable to the neigh hours. _ They had since January ‘‘been going on pretty strong” off and on. Mr Hellish; Did you go up specially to view the house?—Yes. Do you kaow_ the people Jjf house? —No, Ido not." ' ' T To Mr Hislopr Judging hy the style of singing, many of the men were well advanced in a state of intoxication. That state of affairs went"’on two or throe times a week; nnd it was carried on in such a manner as to be a nuisance and annoyance ; to the adjoining ._ . M. J. O'Connor, of No. 89, V anpori street, who lived next door to No. 91, said he had lived there for 20 years. The people in No. 91 came twice a week in motor-ears and "indulged in music and dancing" - They wore rowdy. . “FLIMSY” EVIDENCE.

For the defence, Mr Mellish said that the. evidence about the conduct of the house was flimsy, and showed a c ood deal of malice, as a neighbour who was unfriendly with Mrs Howe first informed the police. If the magistrate granted the application ho should make it so--that posscseioncould be given in two or three mouths time. . I n adj oum i ng — the - woo .f-o F—--two. months. Mr Pago remarked that the evidence as to the conduct ot tho house was not sufficient to warrant tho application being granted, but no strongly advised the defendant to- secure otlicr premises in tho meantime.