The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-04-13
A LADY CORRESPONDENT ON INDUS
TRIAL SLAVERY.

lady dressmaker in Richmond, who
employs labor. writes US the following
letter:
Dear Editor of Richmond Times:
l have been reading your articles on
rights of labor for the last week, but 1
am at sea as TO what constitutes your
freedom of will in regard to labor. ! am
a dressmaker. ! hi.cd three girls 10 help
me to finish off work. Well, Friday was
observed as holiday. The work was TO
be done for Easter Monday. Without say
ing anything to me. they absented them
selves until after Easter Tuesday. | fail
ed to secure the needed assistance; failed
TO get the work done. The garments were
thrown on my hands. and lost my labor,
and will have to pay damages for failing TO
keep my word Is there no redress in
regard TO laborers giving their word? If
laborers can come and hire themselves
and then become dissatisfied and quit,
why. the world will become confusion
and Anarchy, which l understand is the
key TO these Europeans Socialists and
Anarchists. In the early days OF Nir-
ginia, our forefathers prided themselves
on their word of honor. II you promise
a thing, do it, no natter what the re-
suit. Can you enliGhten me?
MRS. B.
Richmond, Va.
Our correspondent is plainly sincere.
and is endeavoring to get clear and prop
erly defined ideas concerning this matter,
and we shall, therefore. treat her inquiries
in perfect candor and sincerity.
We will ask our correspondent this
question: Suppose she. without personally
knowing another dress-maker, should
enter into a contract TO occupy the same
room with her for six months. and sew
for her during that time, but before she
had spent the first week with her she
found her to be an imperious autocrat,
who would allow our correspondent no
freedom Of opinion whatever, and made
life in association with her so intolerable
that our correspondent would rather for
felt FIVE times her wages for those six
months than to remain in that room 10
complete the contract. Would not our
correspondent think the law most oppres-
sive If II forced her 10 serve out that
six months in what would be slavery
and serfdom Of the most intolerable
kind? Would she not think the law a
gracious and a benefcent one which al
lowed her to terminate the period Of
bondage by substituting for her service
payment of money damages? If she were
so situated once. she would thank God
that. in his wisdom, he had permitted Ler
Anglo-Saxon ancestors to transmit thai
liberty TO her as part of those wise in
case which our correspondent has put
is nothing more than any other ordinary
case of a contract being broken. And
our institutions accord TO every man,
woman or child the right to break any
contract whatever upon paying the other
party the damages which a jury shall
say should. under all the facts and cir
cumstances, be paid.
Our law has introduced and permitted |
this substitute for specific performance |
of the contract, in aid Of the freedom, |
the independence and the self-respect of |
the citizen. When this doctrine is the idea |
Of the law we have freedom secured TO |
all men, and self-respecting citizenship |
guaranteed. When the contrary is tole- |
rated, the working man or woman be-
comes a serf and a slave.
The three girls who left our correspond |
ent broke their contract with her, and |
are liable to her for damages. But she
will reply that they are irresponsible. The |
law answers this by saying that she
ought not to hire irresponsible girls, or,
If she does, that she should protect her
self in some way like holding back part
Of their pay until the job is completed.