CHARGES TOO HIGH

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20819, 1 June 1939, Page 10

CHARGES TOO HIGH

LICENSEE CENSURED COMMITTEE’S DISAPPROVAL COMPLAINT BY POLICE HEAD “Having regard to the restricted nature of the hotel accommodation in Hamilton at the present time, it appears as if this may be an attempt to exploit the public,” remarked Mr S. L. Paterson, S.M., chairman of the Hamilton Licensing Committee, at the meeting to-day, when a complaint from the Commissioner of Police, Mr D. J. Cummings, setting out an allegation of an exhorbitant charge at the 'Hamilton Hotel was considered.

The committee decided to adjourn until June 29 the application for a renewal, of a publican’s license made by Hubert Arnold Grayson, the licensee.

The committee urged the. revision of the licensing laws and, as the degree of the licensee’s authority at the Hamilton Hotel was considered during the application, came to the conclusion that the powers of licensing committees in New Zealand should be extended to incorporate the power granted to English committees to inquire into conditions of contracts secured by licensees from hotel proprietors. The complaint from the Commissioner of Police stated that he arrived at the Hamilton Hotel from the Wellington express one morning and desired a room in which to change, wash and prepare for breakfast before proceeding to Cambridge immediately after breakfast. The Commissioner was told that the charge lor the room would be 11s 6d, the amount of a full day’s tariff.

The Commissioner refused to pay 11s 6d for the service he required and, instead, used a bathroom at the hotel, for which no charge was made. Not Full Authority The Commissioner considered the charge exorbitant and it appeared to him that some person other than the licensee was the keeper of the house. “The committee considers that 11s 6d is an improper charge, having regard to the duties of the licensee under the Licensing Act, which makes it incumbent upon him to provide accommodation to the public at a reasonable rate. Any breach of that condition may render the licensee liable to a cancellation of the license,” said the chairman. Mr N. S. Johnson, explaining the attitude of the hotel, said that the chaige of 11s 6d for the service referred to by the Commissioner had only recently been set. It had been found that many people asking for such a service occupied the room during the day also. Under the new labour laws it was difficult to have supervision over the bedrooms during the day, as the staff could not be kept on duty. The Inspector of Police in Hamilton, Mr G, W. Lopdell, said that Hamilton was rather peculiarly situated in the matter of accommodation as two trains arrived in the early morning and travellers often required accommodation between the time of the arrival of the train and breakfast. “I consider that the charge for such accommodation should be commensurate with the service rendered and it ought to be more reasonable than a full day's tariff,” he said.

The inspector pointed out that the Act stated that an innkeeper must provide lodging, meals and accommodation. In his opinion accommodation was there considered separately from lodging, and, therefore, the charge for the 'Commissioner’s “accommodation” was too high. As the Act made the licensee place a “reasonable” charge for accommodation, Mr Lopdell submitted, the charge made by the Hamilton Hotel in this case rendered the licensee liable to prosecution. Control of Hotel “We have had a suspicion that the licensee, Mr Grayson, is not in full charge of the hotel,” said Mr Lopdell in pointing out that the Act made it necessary for the licensee to have charge of the house. Mr Paterson said that several licensees had contracts from breweries which owned the hotels, and in some cases a licensee would prefer to break the law rather than jeopardise his contract by not observing the conditions laid down by the hotel owners. “I think it is a matter which the police might well inquire into,” he said. In a letter to the committee Mr Johnson stated that Mr R. T. Reid was the lessee of the premises and determined the charges for board and lodgings, but Grayson was employed as manager and in every other respect was in sole control of the premises. After retiring to consider the commissioner's complaint, the committee decided that a full day’s charge for the service was unreasonable, and expressed the opinion that the service should be available to members of the travelling public at a reasonable rate. With regard to the suggestion that the licensee had not full authority at tlie hoTel, the committee considered it could do nothing but urge the revision of the licensing law. Mr S. L. Paterson, 5.M., presided at the meeting, at which Messrs A. E. Manning, R. English, T. G. Reynolds, and R. J. Brooks, members of the committee, were present.