March 11, 1899.
THE ESTATES GAZETTE
410
In answer to “ J. R,.,” a lodging-house keeper is not responsible to his lodger if property of the latter be stolen from his apartments either by another lodger or by a third person ; the principle being that the lodger must himself look after his own goods. In “ Holder v. Soulby,” which our correspondent will find reported in ‘ 8 C.Ii., N.S. 254,” the headnote runs, “The law imposes no obligation upon a lodging-house keeper to take care of the goods of his lodger. Where, therefore, certain property of a lodger who was about to quit had been stolen by a stranger who, in his absence, was permitted by the occupier of the house to enter the rooms for the purpose of viewing them,—Held, that the lodging-house keeper was not responsible for the loss."’ Chief Justice Earle said : “ The reason why the law made an innkeeper liable for the loss of his guest’s goods in olden times was that• the wayfaring guest had no means of knowing the neighbourhood or the characters of those lie might meet with at the inn. It was, therefore, thought right to cast that duty on the host■• Knowing that this is •one of the liabilities he incurs, the innkeeper can make such charges for the entertainment of his guests as1 will compensate him for the risk ; and it may be observed that unless the law cast upon him this burden a dishonest innkeeper might be tempted to take advantage of a wealthy traveller. N one of these reasons can apply to the ease of a lodging-house keeper, and the law has never been so laid down.” “Holder v. Soulby” seems to be quite on all fours with the ease put by our correspondent. ________________________
FURNITURE, PICTURES, BOOKS, ETC.
MARCH.
MONDAY, IB.—By Hampton and Sons, 1. Cockspur-street, S.W., at Bohun Lodge, East Barnet, at 1 o’clock.— Furniture, etc.
By Turner and Turner, 20 and 21. High Holborn, W.O., at 47. Barkston-gardens, South Kensington, at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc., and two following days.
Bv Christie, Manson and Woods, at their rooms, King-street, St. James’s-square, at 1 o’clock—Silver plate, etc.
Bv H. S. Hamley and Co., 14, Southampton-row, W.C., at 13, Carlton-hill, Maida-vale, at 1 o’clock— Furniture, etc.
TUESDAY, 14.—Bv Christie, Manson and Woods, at their rooms, King-street, St. James’s-square, at 1 o’clock—Engravings, etc.
By Rogers, Chapman and Thomas, 78, Gloucester-road, S.W., and 50, Belgrave-road, S.W., at B, Pelham-crescent, South Kensington, at 2 o’clock— Furnitnre, etc.
Bv Tooth and Tooth, at their rooms, 187 and 189, Oxford-street, W., at 12 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
By Alex. H. Turner and Co., 199, Piccadilly, W., at 17, *Albemarl e-street, Piccadilly, W., at 12 o’clock— Furniture, etc.
By Furber. Price and Furber, 2, Warwick-court, Gray’s-inn, at 27, Montague-street, Russell-square, at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
Bv Messrs. Drivers, 407, Holloway-road, N., at 32, Pa! khurst-road, Holloway, N., at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
By Dyer. Son and Hilton, 30, Budge-row, E.C., and Blackheath, S.E., at 6, Bennett-park, Blackheath, at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
By William Whiteley, at his rooms, 26, Westbourne-grove, W.—Furniture, etc., and two following davs.
WEDNESDAY, 15.—By Messrs. Hodgson, at their rooms, 115, Chancery-lane, W.C., at 1 o'clock—Books, etc., and following days.
By Chadwick and Sms, 34 and 35, St. Martin’s-lane, Charmg-cross. at 75, Addison-road, Kensington, at 12 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
By Sotbeby, Wilkinson and Hodge, at their rooms, 13, Wellington-street, Strand, W.C., at 1 o’clock— Medals, etc.
By W. D. Hodges and Co., 249, Brompton-road, S.W., at 11, Brechin-plaee, South Kensington, at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc., and following day.
By Christie, Manson and Woods, at their rooms, King-street, St. James’s-square, at 1 o’clock— Obiects of art, etc., and two following days.
By Alex. H. Turner and Co., 199, Piccadilly, W., at 6, Upper Westbourne-terrace. Maida-vale, W., at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc., and following day.
By Slade and Church, 128. George-street, Croydon, at 17, Pa’k-hill-road, Croydon, at 12 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
THURSDAY, 16.—By Herring. Son and Daw, 6, Iron, monger-lane. Cheapside, E.C., and 308, Brixton-hill-S.W., at 83, Upper Tulse-hill, S.W., at 1 o’clock— Furniture, etc.
By Messrs. Foster, at their gallery, 54, Pall Mall, S.W., at 1 o'clock—Decorative furniture, etc.
By Sotheby, Wilkinson and Hodge, at their rooms, 13, Wellington-street, Strand, W.C., at 1 o’clock — Books, etc.
By Randall, Cox and Baker, 62, Coleman-street, E.C., and at East Finchley and Woodside-park, at 11 Baronsmere-road, East Finchley, at 1 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
FRIDAY, 17.—By Large and Co.. 105. Streatham-hill, and 21, Water-lane, Brixton, S.W., at 110, Christ-church-road, Roupell-park, S.W., at 1 o’clock— Furniture, etc.
Bv Sotheby, Wilkinson and Hodge, at their rooms, 13, Wellington-street, Strand, W.C., at 1 o’clock— Books, etc., and following day.
By Tooth and Tooth, at their rooms, 187 and 189, Oxford-street, W., at 12 o’clock—Furniture, etc.
By Wreford and Harding, at their rooms, 44a Wilton-road, Victoria Station, at 6.30 o’clock—! Furniture, etc.
By Robinson and Fisher, at their rooms, KiDg-street, St. James’s-square, at 1 o’clock—Pictures
SATURDAY, 18.—By Christie, Manson and Woods, at their rooms, King-street, St. James’s-squaie, at 1 o’clock—Pictures, etc.
Surrounded by some of the most charming forest land in the kingdom, and possessing an excellent service of fast trains to the City, it would be difficult to name a more favourable residential spot for the tired business man than Theydon Bois, Essex. It is here that the excellent freehold detached residence, known, as the Poplars, Piercing Hill, is situated, which Mr. W. G. Shadrake will offer for sale at the Mart, Tokenhouse-yard, on the 17th inst. The property possesses stabling, tennis lawns, etc., and has an area of nearly four acres.
1 £gal ®opics.
By a Barrister.
[Tile writer will answer any question relating to real property law, or to the practice of Agents. Auctioneers, and Surveyors, under “ Queries and Replies.”]
A somewhat curious landlord and tenant case was recently before Mr. Commissioner Kerr, in the City of London Court. The City and West End Properties, Limited, were suing a gentleman named Coulson to recover the sum of £33 10s. for rent! due and for dilapidations, for which he was alleged to be responsible in respect of certain offices of the plaintiffs in Billiter-build-ings. The plaintiffs’ case was that the rooms were in such a condition when he left that it would be necessary to spend £8 odd in doing them up ; but he contended that the premises scarcely wanted anything doing to them, and that, moreover, the plaintiffs had evicted him by removing his name from the office door and mating it impossible for 1his customers to find him. The plaintiffs said they did not evict the defendant at all. He asked them to try and let the offices for him, as he left before his notice expired, and they endeavoured to do so. Mr. Commissioner Kerr said he had a strong opinion about the tyranny of landlords ; but in this case he was not satisfied that there had been any eviction. “It was very fishy, and there had certainly been too much talking.” He would find for the plaintiffs for £12 15s. for rent (£12 15s. having been paid into Court), and £1 for the dilapidations.
It would not do always to take the learned Commissioner aw pied de la lettre, •and his remarks here about the “tyranny of landlords,” “fishiness,” and “too much talking,” are mere obiter dicta. The law of the case seems clear enough. There oan, as a rule, be no set-off against rent, and the alleged eviction set up by the defendant was properly held to be no answer to the plaintiffs’ claim. Was there, indeed, an “ eviction ” at all l The term, according to all the dictionaries, signifies a physical dispossession, not a notional one, and it is not easy to see how it can include the removing of a man’s name from the door of offices. At the same time there are circumstances in which such a removing, if unjustifiable, might be a serious injury to a tenant in his business ; but then his remedy probably would be by claim or counterclaim for damages for breach of the landlord’s covenant, whether express or implied, for quiet enjoyment. From this point of view it would be well for landlords to remember that they ought not to be too arbitrary even with objectionable tenants. In “Woodfall” (p. V25, 16th edition) it is said, “ A breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment may occur either by a molestation arising from an action of any kind relating to the title or possession, or by any act by which the lessee is disturbed in the possession of the premises. .	.	. Any description
of annoyance on the part of the lessor himself, to the ■occupation of the premises, which prevents the lessee from enjoying his property in so ample a manner as he is entitled to do by the terms of the lease, amounts to a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment.”
“ All lots to be paid for at the close of the sale and no lot to be removed until paid for, each lot to be at the risk of the purchaser as soon as
sold..........No lot to be removed during
the progress of sale.” The above was one of the conditions of sale under which the defendant in. “Wright v. Dickie” •had bought a rug at an! auction held by the plaintiff, but in spite of it—he said, indeed, that he did not know of it, and could not obtain a catalogue—he went up to the clerk during the progress of the sale, asked for his rug, and when he was told that he could not have it until later, remarked, “Very well, if I can’t have it now I won’t have it at all.” Hence the action׳, reported by us last week, in which his Honour Judge Eardley Wil-mot made an order on Dickie to pay the 16s. claimed of him on the delivery of the rug. It had been contended on behalf of the defendant that the claim was for goods sold and delivered, whereas the rug had never been delivered, but a point like this, which would have met with respect and probably with success 50 years ago, only evoked from the Judge the remark that “it was legal jargon. The contract was completed at the fall of the hammer.” For the rest, even in the absence of the common condition we have quoted, we think that it would be clearly unreasonable for purchasers to be perpetually interrupting the proceedings to carry off their lots. Putting an ■express clause aside, what is the implied and ordinary business practice ? If the clerk returned Dickie a sharp answer, as the Judge seemed to think, we do not see that, in the hurry of the sale, he was much to blame for it. The case, however, shows how important it may ■be that there should be no dearth of cati-logues at an auction.
said this low rent was no criterion of the value, as it was fixed at a time when it was thought the Housing of the Working Classes Act might be applied. This remark was fully justified by the biddings, which reached the high figure of £2,270 before the hammer fell. For No. 85, let at £82 a year, there was again a capital competition, in which Mr. E. H. P. Eason (Messrs. Reynolds and Eason) joined. The property was purchased by Mr. F. C. Moore, of 17, Sackville-street, on behalf of a client for £2,220. Three other properties in Clap-ham, Poplar and Brighton were also sold by the same auctioneer, so that he sold every one of his lots. Messrs. Rider and Son sold the freehold corner premises, St. Michael’s Club, containing concert, billiard, and reading rooms, in Portobello-road, North Kensington, for £1,750, and the leasehold house, No, 9, Lonsdale-road, Bays-water, for £500, stabling in the same vicinity realising £80. Mr. Charles W. Millar (Messrs. Millar, Son and Co.) offered a fine freehold corner building site of 10,000ft., situate in the delightful neighbourhood of St. John’s Wood, comprising a residence and studio, with side entrance. The land has a frontage of 160ft. to Grove End-road, and 60ft. to St. John’s-wood-road. Mr. Miliar invited questions and there was quite a discussion about the building line of the street, and whether the proposed building must be set back. Mr. Millar said he had the Building Act with him, and asked for any section to be quoted which required the frontage to be set back. This was not forthcoming, and Mr. Millar pointed out that the road was 62ft. wide in front, that there was a thick wall, and then 12ft. back to the existing frontage. Mr. H. H. Collins, F.S.I., also made one or two remarks on the question. Mr. Millar said the site offered an exceptional opportunity for the erection of flats, and estimated that a ground rent of £800 was not extravagant compared with similar creations in the vicinity. The property was sold for £5,000. Messrs. Montagu and Robinson disposed of ground rents in Camberwell and Clapham-park, for £2,880.
Onlooken.
(Qnmrs & fUplks.
Subscribers are invited to make use of this column for submitting their doubts and difficulties upon points of practice and questions as to custom and usage for solution by brother professionals and others.
In all cases the name and address of the writer must accompany any communication, not necessarily for publication.
Every endeavour will be made to secure a prompt and sufficient reply to each enquiry, hut we are unable to give any !guarantee in this respect.
COMMISSION.-In reply to “ IlTomio,” I am inclined to think that commission is not due on the amount of the proposed purchase-money, inasmuch as though B found a tenant, no effective business was ever done. The additional terms in the agreement quoted puts the matter in a plainer light. Commission upon “the amount received ”is not the same as commission upon “ the amount agreed to be received.” — BARRISTER.
[717]
Painting Name Up.—In answer to “H. G. H. and Co.,” I must repeat that the question is a difficult one and perhaps it would be as well for them to take professional advice on it in the usual way. Treating the point with the brevity to which I am compelled by the exigencies of space, I still think that it would be unadvisable to run the risk of proceedings. Is not the case one for arrangement ?—Barrister.	[718]
The ESTATES GAZETTE can be obtained of our City Agents, Messrs. POTTLE and SONS Royal Exchange.
sold for £885 and £860 respectively. A long-leasehold modern shop and premises in The Grove, Ealing, of the rental value, on lease, of £80 per annum, was sold by Mr. George Ravenshear, for £970.
Thursday.
There was an exceedingly Freeholds !arge attendance in the Dartford. corridors and sale rooms this afternoon, and a large amount of business was transacted. There was an increasing demand for good and sound securities, a fact which was amply demonstrated by the result of an auction conducted by Mr. W. H. Flint, of the firm of Humbert and Flint, who, in accordance with instructions from the High Court of Justice, was offering a number of important freehold properties at Dartford. The Baltic Saw Mill, together with machinery, plant and goodwill of the old-established firm of James Sharpe and Sons, was sold for £5,000, whilst nine freehold shops in Hythe-street, together producing an income of £826 per annum, changed hands at remarkable figures, altogether amounting to £7,625. This total was increased to £18,115 by the disposal of some freehold cottages and other properties also in Dartford. Mr. Flint likewise sold an absolute reversion to one-seventh share of a trust fund, of the present estimated value of £81,404, life aged 69 years, for £2,875, and altogether the prices realised at his auction amounted to the very respectable sum of £21,790. Both Mr. Alfred Moore (Messrs. C. 0. and T. Moore), and Mr. Edward Stimson (Messrs. Stimson and Sons) were engaged this afternoon, and a brisk competition enabled each to contribute largely to the day’s total. Three long - leasehold shops in Railway-terrace, Station-road, New Southgate, producing £132 per annum, ground rent £10 each, lease about 83 years, \yere disposed of by Mr. Thos. W. Muskett (Messrs. Muskett and Sons) for £1,800. It transpired that two residences in Sparsholt-road, Stroud-green, producing £83 per annum, and held for an unexpired term of 57 years, ground rent £18 10s., had been sold privately. Some freehold ground rents at Islington were sold by Mr. George Jackson at 80 and 35J years’ purchase. Other properties disposed of by Mr. Jackson included a freehold house in Marsh-hill, Homerton, let on lease at £40 a year, which fetched £700.
Friday.
There was considerable Shops interest manifested this after-Hoiborn. noon ^ie sales by Mr. Herbert Furber (Messrs. Furber, Price and Furber), and some were unable to find admission to his room, so crowded was it. The chief properties in Mr. Furber’s list appeared to be Nos. 34 and 85, Great Queen-street, Holborn, and he observed that these shops and houses were situated in the immediate locality of, and might be greatly benefited by, the new street from Holborn to the Strand, about to be constructed by the London County Council under the powers of the London Improve- I ments Bill, now before Parliament. “ It has been a long time coming, but is very near now,” said Mr. Furber, “ and what effect this improvement will have on the property, probably you are able to judge as well as myself, but there is no doubt an element of considerable speculation in it.” In offering No. 34, which is held on a repairing lease at £90 a year, Mr. Furber
GASH os.. BY POST 6d. EXTRA
YEAR BOOK
HOUSE PROPERTY
FOR 1898.
LAND AND
A GUIDE TO INVESTMENTS IN REAL ESTATE, SHOWING AT A GLANCE THE RESULTS OF SALES FOR 1898.
This book will prove invaluable to Investors anl Speculators in Land and House property. It gives in oinhfihetical order all the Sales which have been effected at the London Auction Mart and the chief provincial 3, “ *״Tine 1898 For example if an Investor desired property at Barnsbury. be has only to turn to that district to ascertain how property sold and whether Freehold, Leasehold or Copyhold, and the nature of the rent. Investors are thus put in possession of impoitant facts as to the value of property at auction in any district in T on don or the suburbs as well as the country. The volume, which is of a handy size, is alphabetically arranged, narticulars of the properties briefly described, the date of sale, and price realised indicated. To Professional Men and Investors it is an indispensable vade mecum to the Auction Mart.
(Copies of the Editions from 1892 can still be obtained).
FRANK F». WILSON,
“.ESTATES GAZETTE ” OFFICE, 6, ST. BRIDE STREET, LONDON, E-C.