Terminus Hotel (Daylesford)

From Hotels of Ballarat
For other hotels with the same or similar names, see Terminus Hotel.
Terminus Hotel
Picture needed
History
Town Daylesford
Closed 1898-1916

The Terminus Hotel was a hotel in Daylesford, Victoria, <1898-1916.

Site[edit | edit source]

The hotel was in Daylesford.[1] It was very close to the railway station.

Background[edit | edit source]

History[edit | edit source]

The hotel was included on the list of hotels which might be closed by the License Reduction Board in 1915. There was a lengthy report on the arguments for and against closing which is included below:

THE TERMINUS HOTEL. Mr. Bromfield appeared for the owner (Wm. F. Bushby) and the licensee (Robert M. Buchanan). Supt. Bennett stated that the hotel was inspected by him on January 18, It had 19 rooms in all, there being ten bedrooms for the public, four of which were good, and six on the poor side. The building was of wood, and in a fair state of repair. The trade was general, and the furnishings were medium. There was a good four-stall stable and large store-room at the back. The yard did not appear to be extensively used. The sanitary accommodation was fair. By Mr Bromfield: At the Farmers' Arms there are six bedrooms available for the public. The rooms are very superior to the Terminus. I don't consider the Terminus the best position. My experience is that the hotel's nearest railway stations are the worst conducted in the State. I don't consider an hotel close to a railway station is the best hotel. I consider the Terminus about the first hotel that should go out. The house is a poor one, and does not have the accommodation that its position warrants. If the house had been an up to-date one I would not have listed it. I left the Farmers' Arms out because it is a better house, and is more convenient for the general public coming from the eastern portions of the town and district.

Sergeant Myers said that the nearest hotels on the town side were a quarter of a mile away—the Raglan and the Federal. The Farmers' Arms was away another quarter of a mile east. The railway station was about 250 yards away. The trade was a local one. Carters and people doing business at the railway station patronised the hotel. I could not give an opinion as to the value of the trade done by the Terminus and the Federal, and I cannot say which has the best opportunity. I would expect the Farmers' Arms to do more trade than the Terminus, because the surroundings are better. If there was a good building I should favor the Terminus as doing a better business than the Federal, as it would command a better farming trade. By the Bench: I don't know of my own knowledge of anyone using the Terminus overnight when travel ling by rail, but I would not say that no business was done in that way.

Constable Robinson stated that he visited the railway station every day, but not to the early train. His observations led him to believe that most of the passengers arriving by train left the railway station by cab, and passed the Terminus. He saw a few walk to the Terminus and go in, and also a few leave the hotel, for the station. Miners and farmers, used the hotel, while it was full during the tourist season. By Mr Bromfield: I have not noticed anyone going from the train to the Farmers' Arms. I could not say that commercial travellers used the Terminus. By Supt. Bennett: I don't think the yard of the Terminus is largely used by farmers. By the Bench : The main part of the traffic comes past both the Farmers' Arms and the Terminus. I think the Terminus does a bigger farmers' trade than the Federal, but I could not say regarding the Farmers' Arms. I think there are from 400 to 600 miners in the town, and about 30 or 40 live near about the Terminus. By Mr Bromfield: There is a back entrance to the railway goods yard from the Italian Hill road, and people using it would not pass the Farmers Arms. If I were carting from Glenlyon I would probably use the Terminus as being nearest the railway station. Mr Barr to Mr Bromfield: It might surprise you to know that the Farmers' Arms purchases as much liquor as the Terminus. Mr Bromfield detailed the history of the hotel and the ownership, which involved many complications that prevented re-building the premises. Any way, it was a railway hotel, purely and simply. Those having to travel by the early train could stay there and in addition to saving cab fares would be specially convenienced, as was proved by the fact that commercial travellers used it frequently. Then, again, it was the only house in the town that provided early morning breakfast.

Robert M. Buchanan, the licensee, stated that he took possession in June 1906. It was a five years' lease with the option of renewal, which he exercised. He refurnished throughout since taking possession. At the latter part of September last year the owner asked him would he take the place over if he rebuilt, at a fair interest on the outlay. The owner also said he might take the place over himself, and the ultimate decision arrived at was that Bushby would give him so much for the loss of the lease. Later Bushby said it would have to remain as at present until the sittings of the Board as he could do nothing prior to that. There was a public weighbridge at the station that was available to the public. The farmers who came to the station use the house. All the carting to and from the station passed within two yards of his hotel. There was a big hay and corn store directly in front of the house. His trade was a general one and he produced a list of regular callers who went back and forth by the train. Farmers who used the hotel for accommodation would average two or three a week. He had 1s meals and beds 1s and 1s 6d. By the Board: He considered 70 per cent, the profit in the bar. His biggest business was wines and spirits. By Mr Bromfield: He had every thing ready for a meal at six o'clock in the morning. He had been over crowded several times and recommended the callers to Gay's boarding house, which was not available to the public now. His house was a sporting one, while it was used by people to store luggage and parcels overnight to catch the morning train. By Supt. Bennett: During my nine years tenancy my takings have varied slightly; it might have been to the extent of £100. My trade has increased steadily since I took the house. By the Board: I would be only too willing to take the house over if rebuilt. There were to be 19 bedrooms for the public in the first plan submitted to him. Mr Bushby said he would spend £2000 on the new building. The proposed rent was narrowed down to £4 per week. A second and cheaper plan was submitted, but negotiatons were broken off when the hotel was likely to be listed.

William Frederick Bushby, the owner, stated that he was a builder and contractor by occupation, and now resided in Melbourne. His father, who owned the hotel originally died in January, 1898; his stepmother died in 1899, and the place was left to the five children. His two brothers were the executors. It was then his intention to purchase the hotel by buying out the beneficiaries and to rebuild it. There was a sale in July last and witness purchased the premises He went back to Adelaide and sold out his interests there. In September he came back here with the intention of rebuilding, but unfortunately he had to undergo an operation. When he recovered (early in November) he had plans and specifications prepared and it was then too late to commence building as he heard the hotel was to be listed by the Board: I am in a financial position to build according to the cheaper plan produced at a cost of £1800.

John Blampied, livery stable proprietor, said he ran a line of cabs to the railway station, and passed the Terminus several times daily. It was used greatly by the general and travelling public, for meals, beds, and refreshments. Coffee, or breakfast was obtainable for the early train travellers. By the Board: The majority of the tourists go to Hepburn Springs. There are not four females to every male among the visitors at holiday time. By Mr Bromfield: The Hepburn hotels could accommodate about 150 persons, while the boarding houses could put up about 200. I never have any calls on the Farmers' Arms with passengers. Leonard Gay, miner, said he kept a boarding house near the railway station. He frequently took in a surplus of boarders from the Terminus. At present he was not accommodating any of the traveling public, but anticipated doing so later on. His house was full at holiday time. By the Bench: I suppose the Terminus could do a fair trade with travellers it they had no license. I have no stabling accommodation at all. I could not make a do of the boardinghouse unless I worked as a miner.

John Lonergan, railway guard, said that the Terminus was used to a very great extent by people having business at the railway. It was far more convenient than the Farmers' Arms. He had passed the hotel twice a day for over a quarter of a century. James Bolton, farmer, Glenlyon, said he frequently used the Terminus hotel when travelling. He drove from home, left his horse and trap at the hotel stables, and called for it on his return journey. He had never stayed at the Terminus. It was more convenient for the travelling public than the Federal or Farmers' Arms. The farmers used the hotel when carting to the station. Edward Griffiths, butcher, Glenlyon, said that he frequently used the Terminus when travelling, or consigning stock or goods by rail. Similar evidence was given by John S. Widdicombe, farmer, Glenlyon; John McEldrew, farmer, Leonard's Hill; Richard Chapman, butcher, Yandoit; Hugh McKinnon, farmer, Bullarto, Daniel Crowley, farmer, Coomoora; and Richard Cradge Densem, agent, Daylesford Decision was reserved.[2]

The hotel was closed in 1916 by the License Reduction Board who paid the owner and the licensee £500 compensation.[1]

Community Involvement[edit | edit source]

The People[edit | edit source]

  • In December 1914 the license was granted to Robert M. Buchanan for a fee of £60.[3]
    • In March 1915 the licensee was Robert M. Buchanan.[2] At the closing hearing he stated he had been licensee for about eight years.
    • His license was renewed in December 1915.[4]
  • In March 1915 the owner was William Frederick Bushby.[2] At the closing hearing he stated the hotel had belonged to his father who had died in 1898 leaving it to his children.


See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. 1.0 1.1 1916 'REMINDERS.', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 24 November, p. 3. , viewed 11 Dec 2016, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119542449
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 1915 'LICENSES REDUCTION BOARD.', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 13 March, p. 3. , viewed 30 May 2018, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119534989
  3. 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
  4. 1915 'LICENSING COURT.', Daylesford Advocate, Yandoit, Glenlyon and Eganstown Chronicle (Vic. : 1914 - 1918), 16 December, p. 3. , viewed 16 Dec 2019, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article119538818


External Links[edit | edit source]