The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-06 00:00:00

BAD SERVANTS.

(From the Times.)
A very large proportion of the miseries of civilised
life arises from bad and dishonest servants. We
are, indeed, well aware there are many thousand
servants who are endeavouring to discharge their
duty respectably and to the best of their ability.
Happy is that family which possesses one of their
number, for its rulers are spared many grievous
trials of temper and many embarrassments of the
most painful kind. When we denounce bad ser-
vants we do so quite as much in the interest of good
servants as in that of employers. The bad servants
generate suspicion and distrust against the whole
class. How is it to be expected that a master and
mistress yet smarting under the dishonesty of a
butler, the inebriety of a cook, the pertness of an
Abigail, or the wayward affections of a housemaid
or nursemaid, can receive under their roof with any
peculiar satisfaction a fresh representative of any of
those classes ? If we leave out of the question ladies
of the highest fortunes—and they suffer frightfully
from the tyranny of their immediate attendants—
we will venture to say you would not find five per
cent. among the matrons of London who could not
tell you how their existence has been embittered
and their homes rendered miserable by the miscon-
duct of their servants. All due deductions being
made for their own want of temper, want of sys-
tem, want of discretion, there still remains great
foundation for the charge. Now, we want to-day
to give one main reason why there are so many
bad servants, and to illustrate our position by a
most striking example, which has just been
brought under public notice in the course of a
Queen's Bench trial. It is because employers are
so careless in the matter of " characters," as they
are called, that bad servants are enabled to circu-
late so long from house to house, and that there
are so many of them in circulation. Now,
we are well aware that the law does not allow
that a servant's character should be taken away
upon slight or insufficient grounds—and. rightly so
—but the law will always permit a master to as-
sign the reason why he has discharged a servant
from his employ, if the reason be not one of idle
and defamatory suspicion. What generally hap-
pens, however, is, that an employer, for some cause
or other, and most frequently for a substantial one,
becomes dissatisfied with a servant, and yet does
not wish to feel that he or she is turned into the
street to starve. The easiest way of getting out of
the difficulty is to give such a character as will gain
for the servant another situation. This is done to
a most incredible extent ; the natural consequence
is that a bad servant—ay, a dishonest one—finds it
almost as easy a matter as a good one to get a
fresh situation. A more thoroughly unprincipled
proceeding, or a greater treachery against society,
can scarcely be conceived.
The case which was tried on Tuesday and Wed-
nesday of the present week at Westminster
amounted to this :—Mr. Launcelot Shadwell, a
barrister, and therefore a man who should have
known what he was about, resides in Nottingham-
place. He had in his service as, butler from
November, 6, 1855, to April 1, 1856, one James
Parker. When Parker was about to leave his
service at the latter date Mr. Shadwell went
over the plate with him, and found that articles
were wanting to the value of 171. 10s. Mr. Shad-
well refused to pay the man the balance of his
wages, amounting to 61, 10e, After vari9us die-