Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

24 articles on this Page

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY IN AUSTRIA.I

SERVANTS AND THEIR CHARACTERS.

[No title]

A WINTER IN ITALY.

THE INNISKILLINGS AND THE…

THE NEW [STRUGGLE FOR LIBERTY…

THE ADVENTURES OF A CHIMNEY.

WOMEN IN RANGOON.

A BATH BY INSTALMENTS.

INTERESTING SCIENTIFIC FACTS.

THE LAW OF LADIES' BONNETS!

News
Cite
Share

THE LAW OF LADIES' BONNETS! In the Westminster County Court, a cause, Pickwead v. Austen," has been tried, and which was of great importance to theatrical managers. Plaintiff stated that on the 28th December he went to St. James's Hall (London), and paid for four stall tickets. When he went in the evening with his wife and family, the defendant refused to admit the lady unless she left her hat outside. This she declined to do, as she did not wish to part with her property, but took off the hat and put it under her cloak. Defendant objected to this, and insisted on the hat being left in the cloak-room, and pointed to a board that was exhibited, whereon it stated that bonnets were not allowed in the stalls. Plaintiff remonstrated with defendant, and said that he had no right to make such an arbitrary regulation, but defend- ant insisted on his right. Plaintiff then demanded the return of his money, which defendant declined, upon which plaintiff said he would bring an action. Upon plaintiffand his family leaving, defendant offered to admit them if the lady promised not to put on the hat; this piomise plaintiff refused to give, and then left, and now brought his action for 12s., the money he had paid for the tickets, and also Ms. cab fare, although he went in his own carriage. In cross-examination, plaintiff said he did not see the board prohibiting the wearing of bonnets at the time he purchased the tickets, and that his attention was only drawn to it at the time he was "entering the hall. Mr. Lewis, who appeared for defendant, contended that the plaintiff could not recover, as he was bound to conform to the rules of the establishment where proper notice was given, as it had been done in this case, by placards being posted in various parts of 'the hall, prohibiting the wearing of bonnets in the stalls. defendant only asked a slight concession of the lady, which she declined to grant, and therefore he refused admission. He did not seek their custom, but they came to please themselves, and therefore they had a right to comply with the regulations of the house. Defendant sworn Has been engaged several years at St. James's Hall. Never saw a bonnet in the stalls. The rule prohibiting them is most strictly enforced. Refused to permit the lady to go in unless she took off her bonnet. Cross-examined by Plaintiff: The lady had the bonnet in her hand. By the Judge Had no noti6cation in his advertise- ments or on the tickets as to the restriction respecting bonnets. Plaintiff: It is not for the convenience of the public that this regulation is made, but for the purpose of mulcting them in fees. Mr. Lewis You have no right to make such an as- sertion with reference to such a respectable establish-! ment. His Honour, oil a review of the case, said that the proprietor of a place of entertainment had no right to insist on a lady taking off her bonnet, that it had already been so decided; but at the same time recom- mended the defendant to have the notification printed on his tickets, as it might be the means of preventing misunderstanding in future, although he did not think it would justify the defendant in enforcing it. # Judgment for plaintiff for the 12s. he paid for the tickets, but the cab fare was refused, as he did not employ one.

A SWISS TRAGEDY.

WHERE WILL IT END?

A WELCOME TO THE BABY PRINCE.

THE NEW MORGUE IN PARIS.

DISEASES OF OVERWORKED MEN.

A WOMAN'S RIGHTS IN SLAVERY.…

LOOKING FOR A SUPPER.

ENGLAND AND THE WAR IN NEW…

The ^Latte. CONSPIRACY to…

TO THE EDITOR.

lOSMINISCENCE OF THACKERAY.

DEATH OF " A MAN OF MARK !"

[No title]