Federal Hotel (Daylesford)

From Hotels of Ballarat
For other hotels with the same name, see Federal Hotel
Federal Hotel
Picture needed
Town Daylesford
Street Raglan Street
Closed 31 December 1915
Known dates 1912-1915

The Federal Hotel was a hotel in Daylesford, Victoria, <1912-1915.

Site[edit | edit source]

The hotel was in Raglan Street, Daylesford.[1][2]

Background[edit | edit source]

History[edit | edit source]

In May 1912 the publican, Isabel Mulgrew, was fined for selling mislabeled alcohol:

FALSE TRADE DESCRIPTION. DAYLESFORD, Wednesday. - At the police court to-day Isabel Mulgrew, licensee of the Federal Hotel was proceeded against by Inspector Leckie for a contravention of the Trades Marks Act, in selling schnapps falsely purporting to be Wolfe's schnapps. Defendant pleaded guilty, and said that the liquor was left over at a sports booth and evidently emptied into the wrong bottle by the waiters. Mr. Harlow, P.M., imposed a fine of 30/, with 12/ costs. He said that the Bench was unable to decide from the evidence whether the case was one of carelessness, misfortune, or wilful adulteration. Anyway, a great wrong had been done to Wolfe's, as persons who asked for the brand were entitled to get it.[3]

Th hotel was listed for possible closure in February 1915, and the License Reduction Board held hearings in Daylesford in March[4]:

Mr Shellard for owners (Thomas Fletcher and James Dolphin) and licensee (Isabel Mulgrew). Superintendent Bennett said he visited the hotel on Friday, 11th inst. There were eight bedrooms for the public and two for the family. The building was of wood, in good repair, and fairly well furnished. The trade was bar trade and meals. There was a five-stall stable and the sanitary accommodation was fair. The appearance of the yard did not point to it being extensively used for horses or vehicles.

Sergeant Myers said the nearest hotel to the Federal was the Raglan, about 50 yards away, and was a much better building. The classes of trade were different, the Raglan being more expensive. The Federal did a fair share of tourist trade. If the Terminus was a good building it would do better than the Federal from its position. As they stood at present he would rather have the Federal than the Terminus. By Mr Shellard: The Federal caters for the Kidd's Gully people. There is a fair settlement there. It also catered for several blocks north of the hotel and west of it, where there are several industries carried on. It supplies a want to persons coming from the railway station and going by the back track to Hepburn. It is also a convenience to miners living on the eastern side of the town. From my observation, I should say the hotel was necessary. To Superintendent Bennett: Any hotel can be done without. To the Board: If the Raglan catered for all classes the Federal could be done without. I am surprised to know that the Federal trade is considerably less since the Crown Hotel was closed.

Constable Stain said he had boarded at the hotel for over four years. The hotel was principally a miner's house for meals and drinks. It was not largely used by tourists nor travellers. To the Board: There is always a set meal at the hotel. Mr Barr: Your views have developed considerably since the board last sat. Witness: In understood on that occasion that you were going to close ten hotels. You did not close some of the hotels I suggested last time. Mr Barr: Well, some of them must exist now, and yet you say none should be closed. Witness: You did not take much notice of my evidence last time. Mr Barr: Well, we may this time. Mr Shellard pointed out that the Federal had a very good position. A point he deliberated on was the fact that because of increasing traffic the Borough Council had erected a weigh bridge in front of the hotel.

Dr Liddle gave evidence that the hotel was a necessity. It catered for an entirely different class of trade to the Raglan. It was a decided convenience to the working man. By the Board: We have two kinds of floating population, the mining and the tourist. By Superintendent Bennett: The hotel does a good bar trade, and I have frequently seen buggies in the yard. I should say there was not a large business done in meals and teas. If the hotel were closed, l think much inconvenience would be caused the working classes. I think other hotels could supply the loss of the Federal, but it would mean inconvenience to many persons. Mr Shellard here pointed out that the Board had already made reference to the repetition of evidence given before them five years ago, and he suggested that as that was already before the board in favor of the hotel, a repetition was unnecessary. The Chairman said that in view of that fact, it was unnecessary to have it repeated, and he would take the balance from that given previously, first reading it over to each witness. This was adopted in the case of Messrs James, Bolton, Thomas Hewitt, James Dolphin, Thomas Fletcher, John Shaw and Terence Mulgrew. Decision was deferred.[5]

In September 1915 a hearing was held to determine the compensation payments to the owners and licensee:

LICENSING COMPENSATION. Mr J. Locke (Chairman), Mr Robert Barr, and Mr F. Cumming. FEDERAL HOTEL. Mr R.W. Shellard appeared for the executors, George Harold Walton and George William Parker, of James Dolphin, deceased, owner; and Thomas Fletcher, joint owner, and the licensee, Isobel Mulgrew. The claim for maximum period is made on a rental of £2 2s a week. Hotel was burned in 1903, and the new building was completed about December, 1904, from which time it was let till April, 1905, at a tenancy of £2 2s per week. The claim is made up of furniture about £100, included in the rent of £2 2s for six years. The rent in the maximum period would not be the same as at present. The present lease of five years is without bonus, and at a rental of two guineas. Hugh Ross knew the Federal Hotel, he considered the 65 feet x 300 feet land to be worth £250, vacant. He did not think there would be much difference between that land now and ten years ago. The cost of the new building was about £750. For the present, two guineas was a fair rental. Deductions at 12½ per cent., less 2½ if the tenant effected all repairs. Delicensed, 15s per week for 12½ years; 5½ per cent, reduction, about £40. Alterations for dwelling, £15. He thought that £500 was a fair thing for the place delicensed. A fair licensed value, walk in, walk out, allowing for furniture, £1200. The existence of a five years' lease would depreciate sale to the extent of about £50. The land in Raglan street was a fairly good business site. The Chairman pointed out that as a boardinghouse this place should be of great value. The licensee had turned away as many as 30 people at a time. The demand for accommodation would still exist, and hence the building still had possibilities in this direction. Mr Shellard said that the public would not go to a delicensed place like this, because they went to a boardinghouse for the kind of definite accommodation a boardinghouse offered, and vice-versa. Hugh Ross said that in 1904-5-6, £500 would have been a fair price for the house, as a new building, delicensed. He did not think there was any great difference in the loss suffered by the Albert and the Federal. He thought that as a ratelizable asset, delicensed, there was not much difference between the two. Decision deferred.[1]

COMPENSATION OF THE LICENSEE. T. Mulgrew, husband of licensee, said he had paid £175 ingoing. Taking the year 1914, figures were calculated in regard to income-tax returns. There had been a falling off in boarders, many miners having gone to the war. He was claiming £150 as compensation.[1]

The hotel was delicensed and closed at the end of 1915. The owners were paid £550 compensation.[6]

Community Involvement[edit | edit source]

The People[edit | edit source]

See also[edit | edit source]

Notes[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1915 'LICENSING COMPENSATION', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 18 September, p. 3. , viewed 30 Jul 2021, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119537642
  2. 1915 'COUNTRY NEWS.', The Ballarat Courier (Vic. : 1869 - 1880; 1914 - 1918), 20 September, p. 6. (DAILY.), viewed 07 May 2017, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article75149569
  3. 1912 'FALSE TRADE DESCRIPTION.', The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957), 2 May, p. 10. , viewed 25 Dec 2022, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article11672359
  4. 1915 'LICENCES REDUCTION BOARD.', The Age (Melbourne, Vic. : 1854 - 1954), 22 March, p. 5. , viewed 03 Jun 2018, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article154933494
  5. 5.0 5.1 1915 'LICENSES REDUCTION BOARD', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 11 March, p. 3. , viewed 19 Dec 2019, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119534962
  6. 1915 'LICENSING ACT 1915.', The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957), 10 November, p. 15, viewed 10 September, 2015, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article1578545
  7. 1914 'DAYLESFORD LICENSING COURT', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 8 December, p. 2. , viewed 12 Dec 2019, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119529999

External Links[edit | edit source]