Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

" BATION ALS " AND THE LAW.
AMUSING EVIDENCE.
At thc Surroy Quarter Sessions last
April several hours wore occupied hearing
what is known as the rational costume
case, Mrs. Martha Jane'Spra gue, of the
Hautboy Hotel, Ockham, appearing ' to
answer an indictment "for having, on the
27th October last, without -any sufficient
cause, and not regarding your duty as ari
iunkoepor, wilfully and unlawfully neg-
lected and refused to supply Francos W.
Harberton with victuals, which she thoa
and there required, and was able and ready
and willing to poy for."
Lord Coleridge. Q.C., and Mr. Chester
Jones (instructed by Mr. Leslie J. "Wil-
liams, solicitor for the Cyclists' Touring
Club) appeared for the prosecution ¡ Mr.
Horace Aroi-y aud Mr. H. C. Biron appeared
for the defendant. ? . ¿:
Lord Coleridge, in opening the case, said
tho prosecution was undertaken hythe
Cyclists' Touring Club, and was brought
to test the question whether an innkeeper'
had a right to refuse to supply a person
with food because that person appeared in
rational costume. There was no notion
whatever of meting out punishment to Mrs.
Sprague. Ko one doubted that she acted
as she thought in accordance with the law.
On the other hand, if she had not acted
lawfully, it was right she should be told so,
that sh« and other persons who were carry-
ing on the occupation of innkeepers might
understand that their duty was to offor to
all who applied to hotels such reasonable
accommodation and food as the hotels wero
accustomed to supply, unless they were
justified in refusing on lawful, grounds.
It had been laid down by the highest
authorities in tho land that an innkeeper
was not to select his or her guests, and that
everyone cocning and conducting himself or
herself iu a proper manner had a right to
be received. He would prove ¿hat Lady
Harberton did conduct herself in a decent
and proper manner when she applied for
admittance to the hotel in rational
costumo. He asked the jury to put
aside altogether any preconceived ideas
they .might have about tasto in
dress. They might think that rational
dress was becoming, or they might think
is unbecoming, but was it indecent or im-
proper? I£ it were »ot indocent or im-
proper, then the. person asking for admit-
tance to tho hotel had a right to be recoived
in the ordinary way. If it were indecent
or improper, rn.ro. Spraguo was right in re-
fusing admission. Lady Harberton had
been photographed in this costume.
Whether thoy thought it unbecoming or
not, ho should ask them to say whether it
was indecent However, he hoped that
they would] not come to'any opinion which
would hola them up to the opprobium of
being a bigoted jury, who had actually
declared that the rational costume was
indecent and improper. He then called
Lady Barberton, who said she was a
member cf lhe Cyclists' Touring Club, and
invariably wore rationel 'dross when she
«ych»d. On October 27 last year she went
^cUng in. Surrey, and was photographed
<iti "the costume. ííhe. photograph Jfras'
prpänced; anU-eiaminedt^irne- chairman"
anti the juryaicñ.) She.teadiod the Hay.tr'
h$p? 'fiöteh in.ÍÍ^áxí^}jBkÍ^s«!b3t'¡
.1%s,. .^jSprâgu'ë '? ipr lunch. . Urs. rSprague '
said; í'^o. I do,not-admit persons in'that
dress." She replied, "ïhave come.from
London, and am hungry, and I must liare
some. I am a member of the Cyclists*
Touring Club, and I expect to be served on
thé usual terms." Mrs. Sprague said there
was a room at the back which she could
have, to which she replied, " X don't mind
what room I have it in." Mrs. Sprague
then said, " But I would much rather you
~- would go away." She took the bicycle to
the stables, and Mrs. Sprague took her
-through a back door to a room with a har,,
^^^eje &en:,were .drinking - an^,, smoking,
-^joe^ri^nEoä to stay ^KtîoècauMt^sme!'
smelt of all tho horrors of a drinking bar.
Mrs. Bpraguo then left ber. She com-
plained to Hrs. Sprague about the room,
and she replied, " That is all I am bound
to give you, and that is .all yon will get."
Witness said she would writo to the cycling
club, complaining about her treatment.
Mrs. Sprague replied that ehe did not care,
and witness rode away.
Cross-examined : She had no particular
object in going to the Hautboy on this
particular day. She was the treasurer of
the Rational Dress League, but she waB
not aware that the loagne had during the
lost year beon getting up test cases to seo
whether innkeepers would admit ladies in
rational dross. She had walked in Regent
street in the rational costume, and bad
cycled 4,000 or 5,000 miles in it, but had
never been to church or theatre in it. She
should not expect to be admitted to tho
theatre stalls in it, nor if she went in her
present attire.
Do you see many ladies in this cos-
tume F-Yes, on all days I soe some.
Aro the class who wear tho costume of.
the highest?-I don't stop to speak to
them, but. they look quite respectable.
May I take it that the -whole .disputo is
as to whether you should go into the pub-
lic coffee-rooin?-The dispute "is as to
whotherl should bo received in a dirty,
reekine bar-narlonr. . T
Do you expect special accommodation tb"
bo provided for a lady in rational costume P
-I do not expoct to be put, among a lot of
working men, drinking and smoking.
! Will you swear they were working men ?
-I think ono had bis coat off.
A photograph of the, bar parlour was
handed to the witness, who said it did not
look as it did in the picture when she saw
it.
Mr. E. Bi. . Shipton, secrotary of the
Cyclists' Touring Club, produced the
agreement which the club bad made with
Mrs. Sprague. It provided that she would
at all times receive and entertain as ordi-
nary coffee-room customers membors of the
club, whether they wore ladies or gentío
i men. Complaints had been made by Lady
1 Barberton of the treatment she had re-
ceived at the Hautboy. The agreement
had been caucollod and this action under-
taken by tho club.
Cross-examined : The action had caused
a divergence of opinion among the mem-
bers of the club. There was nothing in
the agreement about rational dress. When
the agreement was made rational costumo
! was not extensively worn.
Mr. O. H. Beatty, barristor and legal
adviser to the club, said he had seen the
bar parlour, and it did not lookliko tho
photograph produced. He should not like
to have lunched.thero.
Mr. Avery : Well, I have been there
(laughter)-yearsago, (Renowedlaughter.)
lt was quite good-enongh fer me.
Tho Chairman, (Mr. Cave) : Wera yon
there in rational dress ? . (Laughter.)
Mr. Avery : I was. (Renewed laugh tor.)
The learned counsel then submitted there
was no case to go to the jury, on the
ground of the' absenco of evidence of
refusal on (ho part of the defendant to
supply victuals to Lady Harberton. He
contended that at the most there was a
refusal to supply food in a particular room,
and that a person visiting an inn had no
riglft to select any particular room for his
or herliccommodation.
The Chairman ï Supposing that tho land-
lady said she would not supply Lady Har-
berton with victuals except in a coal
collar?
Mr. Avory regarded that a3 a i-tiuctio ad
absurdum, but it was quito clear that tho
court must leave it to the jury to say
whether tho" defendant was liable to be
indicted "bocauso she did notkeop a room
for ladies of fastidious tastes to have
luncheon in. If the case were loft to the
jury on the evidence of tho prosecution, it
really left it to them to say whether a room
that smelt of tobacco was a placean which
a lady ought to bo invited to take, her
lunch. That was a question of taste, and
j it. would be a monstrous' steté of the law if
a person were to be indiçtod for offending
in a mere question of taste.
! -The Chairman docidod that the case
must tro the J ur v.
Mr. Avery then, addressed the jury for
the defendant, complaining that it was'
most unsatisfactory that such a question
should be left for decision in a criminal
court, and describing the prosecution as
one of the ^greatest abuses of the criminal
Law that had ever come into court.. The
law * as it hf.d boon explained by Lord
Coleridge was laid down to apply to a time
when Dick Turpin and gentlemen of that
ilk were the terrors of travellers. If the
learned judges who laid it down could
know that it was being used for the pur-
poses of this prosecution it would make
thom tura in their graves. (Laughter.)
The object of this prosecution was nothing
mor*» or less than an advertisement for the
Cyclkiii Touring Club and the Rational
. Dress League. Members of that League
had bowi advised not to attend that hnar
ing, and Lady Haborton suggested that
this advice was offered because it was
feared that the costume would so bowitch
the juijr that they would not he able to
give an impartial verdict. (Laughter.)
If ladies who attended the court in rational
costumé might subject themselves to ridi-
cule, they : might Also subject theniseb/ôs
to ridicule if they appeared in the public,
room of an inn or a hotel. «It might fee
ikèii ;he^t:^^-^yiftiou|d-'iMt be
admitted- - to-the court in the pres^festétè
of public opinion on th,e^ubject of divided
slurtEk. (I^^t^A^C^g^: b$ in the,
mrere^
be admitted into a public room which was
crowded with men when they clothed
themselves in this costume. Mrs. Sprague
was not acting from mere. prudery. -As a
licensed holder, she was responsible to the
licensing magistrates for the proper con-
duct of her business and the maintenance
of order, and if public opinion on this sub-
ject was not yet ripe to receive ladies in
this costume under- all circumshanceB, it
might seriously disturb the order and
rod management of a public hotel or inn
ladies in thhi costume were admitted/
'likto^rfche ïpubTié w
of men of all sorts and conditions.
Some men were narrow minded enough to
think that the mere fact of a lady showing
her legs was indecent and improper, how-
ever baggy tho knickerbockers might be.
(Laughter.! Others were demoralised
enough to think it was a fine opportunity
for making jokes at the expense of the
lady who appeared in that costume, about
her ankles, and so on. (Laughter.) On
these grounds ho submitted that Mrs.
Sprague had exercised a perfectly sound
and WÍB6 discretion in the interests of hor
own house and in the interests of tho lady
hersolf, who could not believe that no one
would objoot to hor appearing in this cos-
tume. The real reason why this prosecu-
tion was brought about was that Lady
Harberton wanted to go into the public
room and show herself off, and that being
disappointed at' not being able to do that
this extraordinary action was the result.
Urs. Spragi», tlie defendant. Tras then
called, and said she had been the licensed
holder of the Hautboy Hotel for nearly 13
yours, and during that time she had never
admitted ladies in rational costume to the
coffee room. If they brought skirts with
them,, they were admitted. -The bar-par-
lour into which Lady Harcerton was shown
was used by ladies and gentlemen for
lunching, and she had never heard any ob-
jection to it before. When; she saw her
.ladyship she top her it was not her-CUB- < -
tom to admit ladies in rational dress into
the coffee room, but that she could have a
private room if sho liked. Lady Harberton
said, " I should thou have to pay extra ?"
Witness replied, " Certainly. There is a
room on tho other side of the bar." Lady
Harberton then answered, "I don't care
whore you tako me, so long as you give mo
lunch." Her ladyship was then invited
toto tho bar-parlour, whero thore were
three gentlemen-ono a retired architect,
another a rotirod gentleman, and another
to whose appearance no objection could be
taken, but she said she could not stay, as
she regarded it as a refusal to serve her,
and left. Witness did not say that Lady
Harberton behaved in an improper and in-
decent manner. As au inkeepcr I have no
right (continued Mrs. Sprague) to mako
any remark upon anyone's dress. This has
not been done to gratify any pocular views -
of my own, but in the interests ef tho
business. Lady Harberton and her fol-
lowers are beyond reproach, but there is a
class of persons on the Portsmouth-road
who would absolutely ruin my business
ladies in skin-tights, for instance. If I en-
couraged them I should lose all the people
I have taken the trouble to get. For this
. reason I have drawn tho line -at knicker-
bockers, unless they are covered by a
skirt. ,
Evidence was then given to show, that
the bar-parlour was often used by visitors
for4uncheons, and that it was part of tho
hotel.
Mr. Avory, summing up the defence,
said thore had been a groatTdeal written in
the nowspapers about this case being really
a battle whether ladies in rational costume
should bo' refused admission into an hotel.
That was not the question at all in this
coso. The question was whether this bar
parlour was a placo in which a lady, might
reasonably take refreshment, or whether it
was so unfitted for a respectable woman to
take refreshment as virtually to amount to
a refusal, to supply her with food.
Lord Coleridge argued, on the other
hand, that tho defendant, as au innkeeper,
had no right to make distinctions among
visitors, but was. bound to open her house
to the equal entertainment of all persons
who were willing to be entertained. Her
only cause for not doing this could be im-
proper or indocont conduct upon the part
of-Lady Harberton, but this could not bo
assserted, and in fact she admitted that
she could not say her ladyship behaved in
an improper and indecent manner. The
bar-parlour was a drinking room, with a
drinking bar attached. 'Surely the defend-
ant was not in the habit of inviting her
guests to go there. He contended, in fact,
that this bar-parlour was not "part of the
inn at all, and that therefore Lady Har-
berton was not taken There sho had a
right to go. -
The Chairman, in summing up the case
to the jury, said the roaLquesta'tn wa» this,*"
x Was thoreon the part of--the- ^uefeadant. a'
refusal to supply food in a decent and rea- ?
sonable placo, having regard to the ordin-
ary requirements of a visitor; and was
there sufi oient cause ? The question of
wearmgrattona! dress had nothing to do
with the issue. There was no doubt that
the public would not submit to an inn-
keeper dictating to customers what dresB
they should wear. An innkeeper was
hound to supply refreshment in a fit and
reasonable placo. Was a bar-parlour such
a place? Visitors or guosts could not
choose their own rooms, but they, had a
right to have tho rooms they were shown
into fit to go into.
Tho jury retired to consider their ver-:
diet, and after 12 minutes' absence came
into, court and declared that the defendant
was not guilty. The result was applauded
by the spectators at the back of the
court. _ _
$