A TRAVELLER'S RIGHTS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVIII, Issue 1045, 17 March 1910, Page 21

A TRAVELLER'S RIGHTS.

HOW EAR. MAY THEY BE - ENFORCED? THE AUCKLAND CASE AGAIN. The hearing'of the' charge against Sydenham James Flewellyn, licensee of the Royal Hotel, Victoria Street of refusing without valid reason, to give acCbJfiinodatioh fb one Henry Temp.e was continued berore Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., on Friday. Sub-Inspector Hendrey appeared for the police, and Mr. F. ’ Earl for defendant. The facts elicited at the previous hearing were thdt Mr. Temple had stayed in the hotei tor some time, and when he left the licensee telegraphed him saying he would hot allow him to return to the hoteir Mr. TdnibTe replied that he would /Insist on receiving accommodation, and accordingly drove up to the hotel;, where accommodation was refused, him. The defence was that Mr. Temple’s conduct had been so objectionable as to constitute a valid exduser for refusing to receive him, and in pursuance of this defence further evidence was called as follows: —

' Margaret F.ewehyn, wife of the licensee, stated that Mr. Temple was in the house from January 16 to February 16. Late in the evening of February 12 witness was stopped by Mr. Temple, who complained that her two daughters had been occupying the supper-room tor over an hour, to the exclusion of boarders. Witness asked what business that was of his, and he replied: “ I will make it my business. Not only do you have your daughters to supper, but you have the impudence to have youi- nieces to dinner, occupying the lounge.” Mr. Temple added that if witness and her husband did not know how to run a hotel he would have to show them, and that he would make it hot for them next day. Mr. Temple used similar language to Mr. Flewellyn, and said he was not fit to run a hotel like the Royal. The two gentlemen who, Mr. Temple alleged, ' had been excluded from the sUpper-toom were in the reading-room, and Mr. Flewellyn went to see them. They said that had they had any complaint to make they would have come to Mr. Flewellyn. One of the other boarders stated that he had been insulted by Mr. Temple, who had imputed bad motives to him in taking one of the Misses Flewellyn in to supper. When Mr. Temple said he would make it hot for Mr. Flewellyn the latter called him a “bounder,” and a ‘cad.” Mr. Flewellyn did not use bad language, but he did say that if Mr. Temple were not ah old man and delicate, he would put him out in the street. Witness also gave Mr. Temple a bit of her mind, and recalled that a few days previously he had said in a loud voice of a gentleman who was sitting with his feet on the lounge: “ Look at that bounder. , He has no business in a decent hotel.” Witness further called Mr. Temple a “dirty cad,” and said he was jealous because the young people were enjoying themselves. She used no harsher terms than these, the word “bounder” suggesting itself to her because it was constantly on the lips of Mr. 'Temple, who used to sit on the lounge and pass comments on guests. His criticism of one young lady, who was rather masculine looking, was that she ought to be home milking cows and not staying at a hotel like the Royal. On another occasion he asked where witness got all the ugly women who were staying at the hotel. Mr. Temple admitted one day that he was the most hated man who ever stayed at a hotel, he did not know why. He also criticised other hotels in the city. On one occasion when he went to a tennis party he said he got nothing but stale cake and rotten bananas. When he went out to dinner one night he returned saying that he had had a terrible evening. He never at any time expressed satisfaction with the attention shown him at the hotel, nor with the hospitality extended to him outside.

To Sub-Inspector Hendrey: Witness could only recollect two instances of Mr. Temple speaking ill of those who had entertained him. She could not give the names of any who had heard Mr. Temple speaking uncharitably, beyond one young lady, who was a witness, but he was always grumbling. After cross-examining witness regarding an allegation that in the precincts of the Court she said to Mr.

Temple: “ You dirty cur, you dirty dog,” the sub-inspector drew an admiss on that She used the words “he is a dirty cur ” to a companion, but did not intend Mr. Temple to hear them. Malcoim Chas. Farrington, a farmer of Levin, who was staying at the Royal Hoiel, stated that there were four seats to spare in the supper-room on February 12 after the Misses Flewe.lyn had taken their seats. He generally corroborated the former witness. Fredk. E. Jackson, merchant, Auckland, said that prior to the case coming on, he had only seen Mr. Temple about twice. The first occasion was when Mr. Temple was introduced to the Savage Club as a guest. Mr. Temple contributed an item to the evening’s entertainment, which consisted of anecdotes, which witness thought very indecent. As a result of this his introducer was asked to tender his resignation, or publicly apologise before the club. ■ > Cross-examined by Sub-Inspector Hendrey, witness stated that the Savage Club incident took place 12 or 14 years ago. ' ' - ~ John William McCoy, a mining engineer, said that some years ago he nad been a member of the Orphans’ Club, and on one occasion Mr. Temple appeared there as a raconteur. He told stories on that occasion which were ’ hot stuff.” Witness thought they were obscene. Crocs-examined by the sub-inspector, witness said that the incident referred to, took p.ace in 1896 or 1897. Sub-Inspector Hendrey here made application for permission to cad a witness lor rhe prosecution, who had come io the Court from a sick bed. 'lhe application was granted, and the sub-inspector called James Shaw, who stated that he was a mining engineer; he was on the justices’ list for most of the Australasian States, was the first Mayor of Coolgardie, and was at one time Mayor of Adelaide. He gave evidence as to the high reputation for uprightness and honesty as a gentleman which Mr. Temple had enjoyed among his friends. Further evidence was then called by Mr. Earl. Alfred Jackson, a waiter at the Royal Hotel, gdve evidence as to Mr. Temple’s grumbling about the cooking and the management of the hotel. The head waiter at the hotel (George Burgoyne) said that in spite of efforts made by witness and others it was found impossible to satisfy Mr. Temple. Some people wanted to be moved from the table where Mr. Temple was sitting, though they did not assign any reason for wanting a change.. To Sub-Inspector Hendrey: Witness denied having said to Mr. Temple in the Albert Hotel recently that Mr. Temple had always behaved like a gentleman.

Miss Bessie Laherty, a barmaid at the Royal Hotel, said Mr. Temple seemed to be continually annoyed; and made remarks about the place to witness and others. He criticised one or two of the hotel customers to witness. Of one he said that he was a bounder, and that he ought to be in gaol. 'lhe further hearing of the case was then adjourned until yesterday.