The evening times., 1899-06-29
HOTELS BOUND By CLERKS.
Landlords Responsible for Acts 81
Their Agents.


Their Agents. M
| New York, June 29.-Two decision,
against the Hoffman House. a corporation
| conducting the hotel OF that name. were
handed down yesterday by the appellate
| term of the supreme court Both involve
| matters of interest to travellers and hotel
patrons In general.
The corporation. sued Joseph v. Jordan
In the sixth district court to collect an old
board bill. When Mr.. Jordan was about
to leave the Hoffman House he went to
| the desk, where he saw Mr.. Mcdonald,
who then held about one-half of the capi-
tai stock. chatting with the clerk.
"Oh. Mf. Mcdonald. l. owe bill here,
| remarked Mr.. Jordan.
Eyes? That's all right replied Mr.. Nc
| Donald.
Mr.. Jordan was not entirely satisfied.
| He held Mr.. McDonald's note for several
| thousand dollars, and he was willing to
have the amount of his bill credited as
part payment. but he concluded to speak
| to the president of the corporation, who
| told him that the amount would be charged
| to Mr.. McDonald's account. The clerk
| told him the bill was 'all right" and sent
| for his trunks.
| dams favor. and the supreme court has
| confirmed this position. Judge Mclean,
| who wrote the opinion. held that the cor
| poration was bound by the act Of its clerk.
| He delivered little essay upon the power
Of the magnificent beings who preside at
hotel desks. He said:
Ones travels need be neither frequent
| nor far for him to know that the hotel
clerk is accredited with and permitted TO
a,,Nh IIA fAAa
whether guests without luggage shall be
| received without a deposit. signs accom-
| modations. bargains as to the terms. ad-
justs disputes about the bill. and upon its
| settlement gives the direction which re-
leases and delivers the luggage. He Is
| the ordinary representative of the house
and ordinarily the only representative
| with whom the guests come into contact
| They do not need to enquire into his au-
thority. His very position betokens that >
The Judge holds that the hotel proprie-
| tor, whether an individual or a corpora
| ton, is bound by the acts of clerk. The
| transfer Of board bill from the account
| Of the person who incurred II to that OF
| another is so common that hotel clerks
| are presumed to have the power to attend
| to ii. Judges Freedman and Leventritt
| concurred in these views.
| The other Hoffman House case was q
| suit brought by George A. Wies to Iecov-
er the value of articles stolen from his
room He went to the hotel with his wife
| on December last, taking with him a
steamer trunk and valise containing
| toilet articles. In his absence his bag and
"a suit OF clothes were stolen. He had
| carefully locked the door and had handed
| the key to the night clerk. He put in a
claim for s3l025. estimating the value Ct
his suit at 500 silver mounted toilet set
at S165 and the other toilet articles at
| $s5.25.
In the First district court he obtained
judgment for 's275. The Hoffman House
| appealed and the judgment was yesterday
| sustained. Judge Leventritt. in writing :
the opinion of the higher court said tie
corporation would be relieved Of liability
| only where jewels and money are not de-
| posted in the Office safe after notices to
| that effect had been posted Proper vigi-
| lance must be maintained, and where the
loss of a patron can be attributed neither
to fraud nor negligence on his part the
hotel is responsible. Judge Leventritt
thought the district court would have
been justified in giving judgment for the
| entire amount claimed.