The Daily times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1886-1889, 1888-11-05

tohtra't Aoi services apd its bfSpoDsi-
bnitios-i:cdrcss Tor rpjuries-iccldcnt,
and Hazardous Occupation. .'ui chascs
Made by Scrvanss--,;otico Required.
HAS per on who is hired By the year any
claim on tho employer for care or attention
during illnessr
legally. no. The illness Of the se.'vant
breaks The contract, All tho employer may
engage other help Thc employe canrot en-.
force any claim 10 the place again after re-
covery. The reason for this is THAI the
employer cannot jeop9rdize his bushes in
tsfests icy holding place open for an indeh-
mite tine. lie ls supposed TO keep no more
help than he needs, aud is not required 10
tnrn away good servant who has taken the
place Of ono who has been obliged TO give up
the work on account OF illness. This rule is
not however, strictly adhered 20, es employ
crs are q.ite likely 70 make places for former
employees, especially if they have proven
themselves capable and Trustworthy
"Are an employers heirs bound 10 con
tiDue a contract with serrantsr
"They gre not. TIE contract foi service,
and all responsibilities attaching 10 1t. are
Cancelled iy the death Of either patty. This
IS an implied condition in all contracts for
service
HAS an employer any redress for injuries
70 his property through willfulness or nesb-
genco on tie part Of the servantsF
"None, that is, none Of any actual benefit
20 him. There is "A provision Of law that
provides for certain a.is. misdemeanors or
malicious mischief; but unless the servant
has properly, it is only a waste Of time to III.
stitute legal proceedings unless the offenss
is one th;t demands punishment on the
ground Of protection 10 public interests"
"lf a SCI want hires for given time 70 do
n certain Kind a work and, When tried, ~
found incapable, can the employer be com
PEELED 10 ray wages. or keep the person N
said employment until the time contracted
for expires"
Certainly not Inability 70 perform the
labor agreed upon cancels tho contract. The
servant may not receive any compensation
for labor not properly performed. II, how
ever after failing in the task agreed upon,
ne is kept Il work that he can do, he must 10
paid for the time so consumed, and at a rate
adiudged fair for such occupations For
example: Should you hire a man al giyoa
sum, as a cook, and keep him employed for
some weeks as errand boy you must pay him
the wages ngrced upon; but should You then
put him into the cooks place, and find him
unable 20 do his work properly. he cannot
demand cooks wages if he returns volun-
tarily TO MS position rs crrand 10y. HIS
failure 70 cook as agreed has made a new
contract ecessary.'
care employers ,held responsible Tor acct
dents TO sryents from dangerous furround-
niger
III a servent engages in an occupation
which is hazardous 20 life or limb. ana does
not know Of his danger, or is moi warned Of
1t, the employer is responsible. II the ser
want is aware of danger. and continues IN tho
service, he does so al his own personal risk
For example. Men who work in powder or
dynamite mills, and similar places, DO 50
with fun knowledge Of their danger, and
take the responsibility upon themselves
80 the servant, when Inc takes position
with knowledge OF It's dangers, may be said
TO contribute 20 his own injuries or mis-
fortuncsG
Precisely so; and, in the same way, il
he uses tools or appliances that he
knows 20 bo unsafe Ice exposes himself
TO injury aud cannot recover damages in
case Of personal harm DE may cave the
service If Pee fears to work under such cir
cumstauces. but should be remain he alone
is responsible for resulting injury
els am employer held accountable for the
acts Of his servantF
"ro an extent he IS, while the servan. is
engaged I'D the direct line of his duty; hu. he
is not accountable for damage done while
Che servant is pursuing bis own pleasure ~
convenience. For instance: A delivery
wagon ran over child IL was proven that
tho driver had taken the wagon Ola, withou.
orders. 20 carry some articles for members
of his own family. Therefore the owner was
not held for damages, the vehicle not being
engaged in his business or under Li9 orders,
ms il was held that under such circumstances
the man was not his servant
"Is an employer responsible for debts con
tractei by servants while IN hls employ ana
acting as his agents
"Upder ordinary circumstances the court
would hold them accountable. Ii "a servant
IS i'm the habit Of going 90 a st0r 90 purchase
articles for the use OF the family, and has done
scat the master's orders he is accouutablefor
such debts until the tradesman is notified to
thecontrary. Notice of this sort should always
be given; otherwise, servants might chang
places and continue 10 buy articles, having
Them charged TO the late employer until some
circumstance brought out the fact that the
BUYER was no longer SO employed
. "But the servant would be held account
able. I supposeN
Certainly, for a rnisdcmeanor, and might
he subject l. fine or Imprisonment, OF both
IS &. N i'm Demorcsts Monthly
Monitor Class Of War Vessels.
rr..l.-.l- IL .iI..l.. ri lilrnrnni ll-tlAs lnXl