The daily morning journal and courier., 1897-07-27

nothing to do I could have other even ings. His Honor--Nothing to do; did you do anything at all if you had all that time to yourself? Plaintiff-Oh, yes. His Honor-If your mistress al- lowed you out like this, l should think she employed you for pleasure, and did the work herself Qaughter1, l should think place like that would be.a sec- ond Paradise (laughter). I suppose you were often out then? Plaintiff-Oh, yes. Defendant-Yes; much too often for my liking. Plaintiff was dis charged because I went out on a Tues day evening, and I am claiming the money In lieu of notice. Ills honor Your story may be true, but l should think the defendant must have been a mad-woman if she came to such an agreement. A servant Is generally en- gagged for work. You must have led the life of lady.
 For the defence, Mrs. McKendrick said the story of the girl as to the | agreement was absurd. She did not engage her servants for fun. The girl was told she could go out when she could be spared, but she frequently went out without permission-flirting she supposed. On this Tuesday night she told her not to go out but she went, so she (defendanD sent the girls box home.
 Plaintiff only went to the corner, about two minutes walk. His Honor (smiling)-You should have put him off until another night Qaughter). De- fendant-1 am, anyway, not liable for a months money in lieu of notice, as she gave me notice a few days after engaged her to terminate her engage ment at the end of the month, which accepted. His Honor-1s that SO? | Plaintiff-Yes. that Is quite correct. In giving judgment, his Honor said the case raised again the question of the legality of a servant giving notice to terminate her engagement at the end of the month in which she was en- (which made it illegal, but he (Judge Bacon) was inclined to interpret the law in the opposite direction. His Hon. or considered 1t quite legal for ser want, after being in her situation for a few days and not caring for 1t, to give notice to leave at the expiration of the month. He gave judgment for the de- fendant with regard to the months wages claimed, and further held that the plaintiff was not entitled to her wages for the time she worked, as she broke her contract by going out.
 At the same court on Wednesday, Katherine Bates, domestic servant, sued her former mistress, Mrs. Salmon, for thirty shillings, one months wages, in lieu of notice. Plaintiff said she was engaged by the defendant at thirty shilllngs a month on Wednesday, but on the following day, in the afternoon, she discharged her for no apparent req son.
 For the defense, Mrs Salmon said she could not help discharging the girl, as she was unclean in her habits. She caught her washing some things in cof- fee grounds. Plaintiff-You know I made a mistake and apologized. De- fendant-Made mistake. There your new womanish' ideas Qoud laughter). His Honor-Let us have the
 facts of the case. I am tired of this
 washing question. This is neither a public bath nor a laundry Qoud laugh
 ter). Defendant-Well, 1t does not
 matter; I am entitled to discharge a servant within twenty-four hours. His
 Honor-Is that so? I was not aware of
 it. Perhaps you know and I don't
 Qaughter). can say this, that you did not give the girl sufficient opportunity In twenty-four hours for displaying her washing capabilities, and I shall there- fore give judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costs--Lon- don Standard.