Bismarck weekly tribune., 1889-01-04

IUNE: FRIDAY. JAN. 4 L,
MASTER AND SERV ANT.
POINTS CONCERNING THE RELATIONS
OF EMPLOYER AND EMPLoYE.
A. Contract for Services and Its Responds
bilities-Redress for NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
and Hazardous ccupations-Purchases
Made by servants-Notice Required.
Has person who is hired by the year any
claim on the employer for care or attention
during illness?"
illegally, no. The illness of the servant
breaks the contract, and the employer may
engage other help. The employe cannot en-
force any claim to the place again after re-
covery. The reason for this is that the
employer cannot jeopardize his business in
terests by holding place open for an inde6-
mite time. He is supposed to keep no more
help than he needs, and is not required to
tnrn away good servant who has taken the
ESAsASS "a VI
the work on account of Illness This rule is
not, however, strictly adhered to, as employ
ers are quite likely to make places for former
employees, especially if they have proven
themselves capable and Trustworthy"
care an employers heirs bound to con-
tinue contract with servants?"
"They are not. The contract for service,
and all responsibilities attaching to it, are
Cancelled by the death of either party This
is an implied condition in all contracts for
service"
HAS all employer any redress for injuries
to his property Through willfulness or negli-
gence on the part of the servants?"
None; that is, none of any actual benefit
to him. There is a provision of law that
provides for certain acts, misdemeanors or
malicious mischief; but unless the servant
has property, it is only waste of time to in.
stltute legal proceedings, unless the offense
Is one that demands punishment on the
ground OF protection to public interests"
III a servant hires for a given time, to do
certain kind work, and, when tried, is
found incapable, can the employer be COM
PEELED to pay wages, Or keep the person in
said employment until the time contracted
for expires!"
Certainly not. Inability to perform the
labor agreed upon cancels the contract. The
servant may not receive any compensation
Tor labor not properly performed. If, how
ever, after failing in the task agreed upon,
ne Is kept at work that he can do, he must be
PAID for the time SO consumed, and at a rate
ad1udged fair for such occupations. For
example: Should you hire a man at given
sum, rs cook, and keep him employed for
some weeks as errand boy, you must pay him
the wages agreed upon; but should you then
put him into the cooks place, and find him
unable to do his work properly, he cannot
demand cooks wages if he returns volun-
tarily to his position as errand boy His
failure to cook as agreed has made a new
contract necessary
care employers sheld responsible for acci-
dents to servents from dangerous surround
ingsf' .
IF servent engages in an occupation
which is hazardous to life or limb, and does
not know of his danger, or is not warned Of
1t, the employer is responsible. If the SER
want is aware of danger, and continues in the
service, be does SO at his own personal risk.
For example,: Men who work in powder or
dynamite mills, and similar places, do so
with full knowledge of their danger, and
take the responsibility upon themselves"
$50 the servant, when he takes a position
with knowledge Of its dangers, may be said
to contribute to his own injuries or mis-
fortunes?"
Precisely so; and, in the same way, if
he uses tools or appliances that he
knows to be unsafe, he exposes himself
to injury and cannot recover damages in
case of personal harm. He may leave the
service if he fears to work under such cir
cumstances; but should he remain. he alone
is responsible for resulting injury"
us an employer held accountable for tho
acts of his servant2'
10 an extent he Is, while the servant is
engaged in the direct line of his duty; but he
Is not accountable for damage done while
the servant is pursuing his own pleasure or
convenience. For instance: A delivery
wagon ran over child. 1t was proven that
the driver had taken the wagon out without
ORDERS to 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 his orders,
as 1T was held that under such circumstances
the man was not his servant"
us an employer responsible for debts con-
tracted by servants while in his employ and
acting MS his agents"
"Under ordinary circumstances the court
would hold them accountable. If servant
Is in the habit of going to store to purchase
articles for the use Of the family, and has done
scat the masters orders, he is accountable for
such debts until the tradesman is notified to
the contrary. Notice of this sort should always
be given; otherwise, servants might change
places and continue to buy articles, having
Them charged to the late employer until some
circumstance brought out the fact that tho
buyer was no longer 80 employed"
but the servant would be held account
able, supposeT'
Certainly, for misdemeanor, and might
be subject to fine or imprisonment, or both"
--''S s. n" in Demorest's Monthly.
Monitor Class Of War vessels.
Hundreds Of others Of different types have