The Dawson news. (Dawson, Ga.) 1889-current, 1908-01-29
The LAW OF FARM LABOR
CONTRACT AND IT'S REGULATION
90 COMPILED BY COBB.
,,ar Supreme Court Judge Gives
the Legal Status of the Farmer
and His Tenant.


and His Tenant.
nj Local regulation between the
,,,or and his laborer rests wholly
non contract, expressed or implied.
one is bound to render the SER
-. the other to pay at the stipu-
,.d nrfce. or the value thereof in
IT, absence of an agreement as to
rica The laborer is not bound I'M
re he has capacity to contract. A
.;nor Iaborer may ordinarily aban-
don the contract at any time, and
,hi1e he cannot recover on the con-
W. for work actually done prior
tho abandonment he may recover
,,bat such service was reasonably
..or+b and the farmer cannot claim
oooinst him any damage resulting
trom his abandonment of the con-
tract.
contract for the service of a
u,iror should be made with the par
ont or guardian
# there is no definite period of
on,n1ovment the hiring is at will; the
farmer having the right to discharge
and the laborer to leave at any time
without cause.
Contracts for service which cannot
no nerformed within year from the
time they are made must be in writ
mo contract for a year, or less,
n begin at once is enforceable
though only verbal.
One who knowingly employs la
borer who is under written contract,
attested by one or more witnesses,
or who knowingly entices a laborer,
whether under verbal or written
contract, is not only liable in dam
ages to the farmer, but subject to
criminal prosecution.
When a laborer makes contract
for definite time, and before such
time expires voluntarily leaves with
out cause. or the consent of the
farmer he cannot recover any part
of his wages then unpaid. He must
render the entire service for which
he has contracted This is the rule
in England and most of the states
of the Union, In New Hampshire
the rule is that the labOrer may re-
cover what his services up to the
time he leaves were reasonably worth
less any damage occasioned to the
farmer by his leaving. This rule has
been followed in Indiana, Iowa, Mis-
sissippi and Texas. The New Hamp-
shire rule seems to be more IN &C
cord with common honesty and JUS
tice than the English rule, which IS
of force in this state. The farmer
may recover from his laborer any
damages resulting from his leaving
without cause, and the laborer can
not offset against such damages the
value of his labor in any case where
the contract was for an entire SER
vice. If, however, the labOrer is
prevented by illness, or other provl-
Dental cause from completing the
contract he may recover for the SER
vices actually rendered.
If the farmer fails to perform his
part of the contract the laborer may
abandon the service. He is also JUS
tilted in leaving if the farmer as
saults him, or compels him to work
on Sunday other than doing acts OF
necessity, such as caring for live
stock and the like, or if the farmer
is guilty of any act or neglect preJu-
dcial to the morals, health, safety,
or reputation of the labOrer. In
sulting language or offensive epithets
used to laborer, when there is no
proyocatiOn, may justify him in leav-
ing, but mere harsh language Will
not, neither will difficulty with an
other laborer. 1t is impossible to
enumerate all of the instances in
which the laborer is authorized to
leave, but a general rule is that for
any good cause the laborer may
abandon the contract and compel the
farmer to pay for the time he has
actually worked. The farmer is not
liable on a contract made by the
Iaborer unless the farmer has ex-
pressly authorized the contract or
authority can be inferred from the