Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LADY'S LOST JEWELS

A HOTELKEEPER'S LIABILITY. The Gordon Hotels, Limited, were cast >n damages to the extent of £951 lis 4d in tho King's Bench Division, London, recently, because of the loss of a visitor's jewellery from a room in the Hotel Metropole, Northumberland avenue. Mr and Mrs Duncan were the plaintiffs. The evidence was to the effect that Mi* Duncan arrived at the Hotel Metropole fro.n Cardiff in November of last year. H°r locked trunk, which contained jewellery to the value of nearly £I,OOO, she left in h';r bedroom at the hotel. On leaving the beuroom she locked the door and deposited tne door key with the bureau clerk downsta~s. When Mrs Duncan returned to the hotel fnm shopping she asked for the key of her bedroom at the bureau. The key could not be foun<l, and the door was opened by a cham bermaid with a master-jkey. Mrs Dunca'i noticed a clasp-knife open on the dressia? table of her room, and her suspicions were aroused. She examined her trunk, and found that it had been forced open, and that ali the jewellery had been extracted. The jewels had never been registered. The claim for damages against the hotel proprietors was on the grounds that they had been guilty of negligence through their servants hav ! iig given up the key of the bedroom to tie wrong person. Tuis key was found some days later in a lavatory at the Char up Cross Station, and was returned to the manager of the hotel. For the defence it was advanced that under the Innkeepers' Act the liability was Emit d to £3O, if, according to the notices exhibited, guests did not lodge valuable goods with the landlord for safe custody, and if there was no default or negligence on the part of hj» servant and himself. Mrs Duncan said sh* saw the notice in the bedroom, but did n» observe one in the haU. The jury held that there was default on the part of the defendants' servant*, and that Mrs Duncan had exercised ordinary and - sonable care. A verdict was entered for the plaintiffs. for the amount mentionel, wi'** costs. •

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19020206.2.5

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 11675, 6 February 1902, Page 1

Word Count
360

LADY'S LOST JEWELS Evening Star, Issue 11675, 6 February 1902, Page 1

LADY'S LOST JEWELS Evening Star, Issue 11675, 6 February 1902, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert