The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1892-08-25

wives May D~nsaA Payment Tor work
frsm Any Employers bat Husbands
A decision Of much importance 10 mar
ned women has Recently been rendered
by the court Of appeals Of this state IN
the case Of Hsrwig Blaechinska against
the Howard Mission and Home for Little
Wanderers
The plaintiff. = 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 10 the
court of appeals and was there argued
before the second division of that tn
bunal. The only error upon which the
appellant asked for a 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 the
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 a seamstress at salary OF i've and
six dollars a 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 1.-THE loss of the
salary could be given in evidence as an
element of damage, the same as if she
had been working for 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 WON
en-, which began with the enabling act
| of 1860, giving wife a 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 conveyances
of land directly from him.
He shows that it has uniformly beer
held, Notwithstanding the various
changes effected by the successive stat
utes relating to married women, that q
husband still has the right to the serv
ices of his wife so far as household work
is concerned, even if that household
work be Of 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 sht
works for third person, the rule is diff
ent, and under an act passed in 1884 hel
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 a
"a man cannot make valid contract II
pay his wife for extraordinary services
I rendered in his household or for work
ing on his farm, how can he make
valid contract to pay her for helping
him make clothes in his business as
custom tailor?' The learned judg
comes to the conclusion that there is n
basis for any distinction.
The effect of this decision may b
plainly stated. The husband canno
now compel his wife to do work TO
him which does not fall within the def
milton and scope of household service
any more than he could at common law
but if the wife consents to do an
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 stric
line of her duty, belong to him, and
he pays her for them it is a gift" o
) the other hand, whatever she earns b
means of labor performed under her ow
Independent contracts for persons othe
/ than her husband is made by statute he
individual property.
The case is one Of exceptional interes
as presenting clear statement of tn
rights of married women as they no
exist in this state with respect to con
pensation for their services.-New Yor
SUI