Los Angeles herald., 1892-04-06
Highest of all in Leavenng PowerLates u S. Govt Report
q! Bssiss Bsxas7
ABSOLUTELY PURE
ABSOLUTELY PURE
THE WAGES OF MARRIED WOMEN.

Wives May Demand Payment for Work
from Any Employers but Husbands.
Adhesion of much importance to mar
ried women has recently been rendered
by the court Of appeals of this state in
the case of Hefwig Blaechinska against
the Howard Mission and Home for Little
Wanderers.
The plaintiff, a married woman, sued
the defendant, charitable corporation
to recover damages for injuries which
she sustained by falling over coal hole
in the sidewalk which the servants of
the defendant had failed to guard prop
erly. Upon the trial she recovered
verdict of $500, which was affirmed by
the general term of the supreme court in
this city. The case was taken to the
court of appeals and was there argued
before the second division of that tri-
bunal. The only error upon which the
appellant asked for reversal of the
judgment was the instruction of the trial
judge to the jury that in estimating the
damages sustained by Mrs. Blaechinska
they might take into consideration tho
loss of wages which she had sustained
by reason of her inability to work in
consequence Of the accident
At the time she was injured she was
living with her husband, who was a
custom tailor, and was working for him
as seamstress at salary Of five and
six dollars week. The general term
held that this money which the plaintiff
received from her husband for services
outside of her household duties was her
own property, and that ''the loss of the
salary could be given in evidence as an
element of damage, the same as if she
had been working for a stranger" The
appellant insisted that this view of the
law as it now exists in the state of New
York was erroneous.
The opinion Of the court of appeals is
written by Judge Irving G. Vann, of
Syracuse, and is concurred in by all the
members of the second division. He re-
views the legislation in this state re-
moving the disabilities of married wo1n-
en-, which began with the enabling act
of 1860, giving a wife separate estate
in whatever she may acquire by her
trade, business, labor, or services car
ried on or performed on her sole and
separate account, and extending down
to the act of 1887, which authorizes a
married woman to convey lands directly
to her husband and accept conveyance;
of land directly from him.
He shows that it has uniformly beer
held, Notwithstanding the various
~, of <oI %,4
utes relating to married women, that q
husband still has the right to the serv-
ices Of his wife so far as household worE
is concerned, even if that household
work be OF a somewhat exceptional char
acter, and that even when she does out
door work upon her husbands farm, she
cannot recover any wages for such labor,
although she holds her husbands writ
ten promise to pay her for it. If she
works for third person, the rule is diff
ent, and under an act passed in 1884 her
earnings in that event would be her own.
Finding the law to be well settled by
adjudication to the effect we have stat.
ed, Judge Vann inquiries, inasmuch as
"a man cannot make valid contract to
pay his wife for extraordinary services
rendered in his household or for work
ing on his farm, how can he make a
valid contract to pay her for helping
him make clothes in his business as a
custom tailor" The learned judge
comes to the conclusion that there is nc
basis for any distinction.
The effect of this decision may be
plainly stated The husband cannot
now compel his wife to do work for
him which does not fall within the def
milton and scope of household services
any more than he could at common law,
but if the wife consents to do any
other work she cannot compel her hus-
band to pay her for it, In other words,
''such services as she renders him,
whether within or without the strict
line of her duty, belong to him, and if
he pays her for them it is a gift" On
the other hand, whatever she earns by
means of labor performed under her own
independent contracts for persons other
than her husband is made by statute her
Individual property.
The case is one of exceptional interest
as presenting clear statement Of the
rights of married women as they now
exist in this state with respect to COM
pensation for their services.-New York
Sun.
Send the ANNUAL HERALD to your east
ern friends. No present could be more