HICH-CLASS BOARDING HOUSES.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 12790, 15 June 1912, Page 3

HICH-CLASS BOARDING HOUSES.

j . ■ , ♦'. : ; ' '-- ;. -> I (Per Press Association.) ! AUCKLAND, lastAuight. ; An important case concerning the • liabi.ity of private hotel and boarding j hou*<" keepers to provide meals for j casual callers was heard at the Supreme /J Court to-day before IMr Justice Kd- | wards, when the Labor Department ap- .'■, J p.ealod against the decision of Mv -Fi ;j V. Fraser, S.M.; given m the action J Inspector of Factories v. Mrs Sherf , | \ proprietress of "Gleii Alvon." The | original information was under the ! I Shops and Offices Act, 1203, nnd the \ [Amendment Act, 1910. Mrs'Sherf be- { j ing irharged that bein^ the proprietress ! 'of a restaurant, to wit "( i len Alvon,'' ! Ashe did fail. to keep a. wages and time < book as provided by the Amendment j Act. li_ 10. The ''facts were ay-reed on, < and one point which meiint 'the root hf j the whole case was that meals were not j supplied ; to . any person . but. /Lodgers or ] lodgers'- -.guests*.- The case' was, bropght "; as a test case m .order to ascertain ; ; whe J her establishments '.such <;s '*01en ' j Alvon" cam_-;-M'ith£n.ythe' v -stQpe of thq ' ; above-mentioned A'ct^ Mr Fraser .de- i cjded .that .On .-'ihe' -.facts;'. "(Men Alvon" ! did not- come within sueh 'a, definition, ! and dismissed the information. i| At .this morning's proceedings Mr I Selwvn Mays appeared * for the Crown ! ! and Mr H. P. Richmond for Mie respon- j I dent. Mr M«nySj m opening the case, ! I stated that' the object of the appeal was j I to ; obtain a .Suoreme Court judgment;' upop the point : involved for the giiid-' ' ance of the Department m administer- .' ing the Act..--' Tho chief argument he ) would rely upon, was that if "Glen | Alvon" -and .similar" institutions were j not within the scope of the Amendment. ; Act. then a;' very large number of em- i plovers m these institutions -throughout" the Dominion would' be; shut out ; from all : its benefits while a similar number ; of employees' 'doing precisely the smne j wor.'-- m licensed hotels and restaurants | would get the protection of the better i condi'iOns provided for by the law. Tn 'oth:*:*-' words it could not have b?eh the intention of the law that a housemaid, say at the Grand Hotel, should have her hours recorded iii a time hook, while a housemaid at "Glen .Alvon" doing similar work should be .outside the '_Act; ' ; ; ;; His Honor, wtthotit calling' unon Mr Richmond for respondent, slid that wh-'iever the -policy of the Act mierht he he was bound by the plain meaninur of t lie .-words iii. sub-section 2, and tohik mind the words "general public" meant "general public." and he knew that if it. person from off the sttfeet not a lodger came to "Glen Alvon" and asked to be ; supplied with . n .' mOa-li that oerson would not be supplied, and unless such persons were supplied the establishment did n<Jt 'come within the meaning of the word "restaurant" as defined by the Act; His Honor referred to the fact that at' higher-class boarding houses only the "better class of persons were received— -that wafc, people who > could afford .to "pay morel "Imagine 'a .man. off -th- wharf gom«> into 'Glen Alvon' or* any other such boarding-house," remarked his Honor, facetiously, "and snving, 'Well, mispus. I want dinner!' That state of thines prevailing, Hon. Mr Rryce or some high duke, for* instance, might be sitting! .alongside -'-a man, from the wharf, or tho Chief Justice might ' have a wharf laborer on on?, side and a, coal lumper on the other." ' Continuim*. his Honor said Mr May? had taken the argument for a-npellant as fir 'as it co-Id be taken. „hutn thfl position could not h? altered, and lh^ appeal would therefore l.r; dismi^d.