The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-06-21
WHAT DRESS SHOULD COST.

The appellate division of the SUI
preme court, New York, has just dis
posed of an appeal Involving the ques-
ton of whether Samuel w. Peck OF
his wife, Mrs. Josephine Peck, was re-
sponsible for bill of $565 which the
wife incurred at her tailor's for few
suits and other articles. Incidentally
| the case brought .sut some expert tes-
of a woman who wants to be well
| dressed.
| Samuel w. Peck, a rich clothing
manufacturer, and his wife lived at
the Hotel Ansonia. The testimony
showed that the husbands income
was $500 a year, and Mrs Peck
said that they lived at the rate of
$4,000 year. Peck used to allow
his wife $500 month for clothes and
| S35 week for cab fares and lunches.
Mrs. Peck contemplated a trip to
Europe, and to prepare for it she Wis
tied the womans tailoring establish
ment of one Solomon Resented and
ordered these few Simple" things:
Brown leather automobile coat, 500;
blue and white suit, S135; blue taft
| feta coat, $50; pique suit, $3.50, and a
white serge suit, $50, making a total of
1855.
All these Mrs. Peck had charged to
her husband, but matrimonial trou-
bles arose in the Peck family, and the
husband refused to pay the bill. The
tailor sued Peck. The suit was tried
before the late Justice Truax, who
dismissed the action without submit
ting to the jury the question of the
defendants liability.
Counsel for the plaintiff showed
that Mr.. and Mrs. Peck were living
together when the debt was contract
ed by the wife. Resented had been
in the employ of a Fifth avenue
tailor where Mrs. Peck had dealt, and
the plaintiff wanted to show that his
prices. compared with those of his for
mer employer, were not too high
Justice Truax said: THE court will
take judicial notice that the place is
high priced"
Besides the other allowances to his
wife to which Peck testified, he said
he gave to his wife $1,000 additional
before she went to Europe, and that
she took with her a $4,000 letter of
credit.
Peck testified further that he
thought Mrs. Peck would buy her
dresses abroad with the $4,000. But
Mrs. Julia Solomon, sister of Mrs.
Peck, as a witness for Peck, told how
mistaken the husband was.
Mrs. Solomon helped her sister pack
her five large trunks, and these are
some of the things Mrs. Peck took
with her to Europe: More than 80
dresses, dozen pairs of gloves, IL
hats, dozen pairs of shoes, 80 pairs
of silk stockings, and 10 pairs of rid
ing tights.
Peck had advertisements published
in Paris that he would not pay any
bills of his wife. AS to the require
ments of a we'll dressed woman, Ros-
enfield, the plaintiff, testified that no
we'll dressed woman wore a dress or
suit after the style had changed, and
that the styles changed twice a year,
spring and fall.
Mandel J. Flam, another expert,
testified that we'll dressed women do
not wear for more than three or four
months the sort of suits that Mrs.
Peck ordered from Rosenfeld. The ap-
pellate division has reversed the de-
cision of Justice Truax, and has or
dered a new trial of the suit, saying:
'"They certainly were not necessi-
ties, strictly speaking, but the ques-
ton was presented if they were not
necessities in the sense that they
were articles of dress suitable for the
wife's station in life, his means, and
their mode of living"
Furthermore, the higher court holds
that it is for the husband to show
that the wife was amply provided