The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-05-10
FIT OR NOT TO FIT
Dressmaking Troubles Aired in
City Court.
Court Decides Garment Doesn't
Have to Suit.
QUESTION OF A BILL.
Mrs. RagIand Refused to Pay
Because She Wasn't Satisfied.
Judge McCabe Allows Amount,
Less Alteration Charges.

If a dress does not suit, but if the
dressmaker has done her work on the
garment, the patron of the dressmak-
ing establishment must pay for the
dress, fit or no fit, according to the de-
cision made by Judge McCabe in the
city court this morning, in the suit OF
Mrs M. O'Brien, dressmaker, against
Mrs. May Ragland for payment of an
unpaid dressmaker bill amounting to
/ $2428. Mrs. O'Brien admitted that she
agreed to allow Mrs. Ragland 81 for
having the garments worked over so the
court knocked "a off the bill and gave
Mrs O'Brien judgment for $20.2S.
The attorneys in the case fought the
contest over the dressmaking bill for
nearly three hours. They ripped the
garments, so to speak, up one seam and
down the other and then basted them
together. The court and the lawyers,
all being married men, should have
known something about dressmakfne
and the plans and specifications for
skirts, shirt waists and jackets. but
when it came to expert testimony on
shirring, Innings, basting, fittings, etc,
they became somewhat muddled
Then when a dressmaker was placed
on the stand to give expert testimony on
the art of making dresses, and of pleas
ing customers, some secrets of the bust
ness unknown to the average man were
perts that any dressmaker can find
faults with the work of another dress
maker.
Miss Katherine Meyer, dressmaker,
was placed on the stand by the defense
to give expert testimony as to the faults
of the clothing made for Mrs. Ragland
by Mrs. O'Brien. Miss Meyer testified
that she was engaged by Mrs. Ragland
to remake the garments. She testified
that she had an interview with Mrs
] nd eF1 INF
the garments were at fault Il told her
I would not allow any such work to
| leave my establishment" said Miss
Meyer.
Was the Jacket a ftp" asked Attor-
ney Ralph Cav, representing Mrs. Rag
land.
1T was misfit," replied Miss Meyer.
On cross-examination Attorney W. 2.
Atchison, who appeared for Mrs.
O'Brien, asked: You and Mrs O'Brien
both have dress making establishments
IN the Mills dry goods store building?'
yes, sir" replied Miss Meyer.
There is good deal of rivalry be-
tween you and Mrs O'Brien?"
mo. not that I am aware Of
DO dressmakers run Establishments
in competition with each other in the
same building, without rivalry?"
I'VE each have our. customers. Some
of my customers like me and some of
them despise me-" replied Miss Meyer.
and some of Mrs. O'Brien's customers
like her"
Mrs. O'Brfen. on rebuttal, testified
that customers of Miss Meyers estab-
nshment had come to her and com
planned about work done by Miss Meyer
and wanted her to do the work over
and make it as they thought it should
be.
Can one dressmaker find fault with
another?" Attorney Atchison asked of
Mrs. O'Brien.
IF there is jealousy between them
any dressmaker can find fault with any
dress made" replied Mrs. O'Brien-
Mrs. O'Brien gave technical testimony
as to the skirt waist and jacket made
for Mrs. Ragland. She said Mrs. Rag
land demanded certain changes and
that she made them and that then when
Mrs. Ragland demanded more a1tera-
tons she decided not to make them.
She said the sleeve on one side of the
waist was shorter than the sleeve on
the other said Mrs. O'Brien. That
was not the fault with the garment but
with Mrs. kagland- She said one side
of the waist was shorter than the other
and I put in stays to force it down"
Was there any conversation before
making the dress as to how it should
| be made %
yes. plenty" replied Mrs.
O'Brien. I'VE had conversation for
ANY arguments as to how to make
the garments %
yes, plenty of argument. She
wanted one style and I wanted an
Did she make her own selection ?''
yes"
Did your customer say before you
began the garments that she was very
/ particularly
yes, and told the girls to be very
careful"
Did you send her bin?"
yes, I sent a bill for $24.2S for
making the skirt and waist and jacket
and agreed to knock of $500 as ex-
Denses She would have in going to an.
other dressmaker to have the gar
ments changed"
Mrs RagIand testified about the
garments. t'"They did not fit me-" she
said. THE skirt was too short in the
back. The jacket did not fit at all
| Mrs. o Brien tried to change them but
could not make them satisfactory.
had the whole suit made over at q
cost of SIS. I had to buy $12 more
/ of MATERIAL
was ever a dress made perfect
without any flaws in it2" Attorney
Atchison asked of Mrs. Ragland or
cross examination.
Not by any dressmaker in this
! town. replied Mrs. Ragland.
Mrs. O'Brien's expert skirt maker
/ testified that in making Mrs. Ragland's
skirt she did most excellent work.
The regular jacket maker testified
that she excelled in her work on Mrs
Ragland's jacket
The waist maker in Mrs. O'Brien's
establishment testified that she was
unusually painstaking in making the
waist
The court decided that, after sitting
the testimony, that the garments fit
ted within 81 worth of the dress
makers charge and gave Mrs. O'BrieT
judgment for $20.2S.
100000 Acres of Land Free.