EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYED.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XII, Issue 3975, 28 November 1891, Page 2

EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYED.

A Dressmalsor in Court.

An interesting case (vas heard in the MdEterton E.M. Court yesterday ifternoon, before Messrs B. Boys and W. Lowes, J.P.'s, when Mr Peter Dickson, of the Wholesale Drapery Company, claimed from Miss Maggie Clark, a dressmaker who was, till recently, in his employ, the sum of £2 2s Bd, the value of a lady's blowse and the making of certain silk bodices. As a set off Miss Clark claimed tlie sum of £9 15a for a tweed skirt, a black skirt, and a quantity of paper patterns which had been left in the workroom.

Mr Pownall appeared for Mr Dick son, and Mr Beard for Mis 3 Clark.

Mr Pownall, in his opening address, said the case was a very peculiar one. Mr Dickson was suing Miss Clark, who was recently in his employ, as a dressmaker, for the value of certain goods which had been made and appropriated to her own use.

Maggie Clark, sworn, sfated : I am a dressmaker residing in Masterton. I w»s recently in the employ of Mr Dickson. On the Bth of October I made a blowse out of iiiy own material. The material was procured from Mr Dickson, and I paid him 2s 6d for it. I have not the receipt, but I paid him at the desk with a £1 note. It would take from a yard and a quarter to a yard and a half of cloth to make a blowse. I did not tell anybody who the blowse was for. The blowse was made during working hours. I had devoted extra time to finishing two dresses, and 1 thereforr; made the blowse in the time of Mr Dickson. I did not ask permission to make the blowse, as there was nobody to ask. I did not recognise Mrs Dickson. I only had one master. I paid for one yard of blowse, and I used another three-eighths of a yard which was in the room as cuttings. Whatever was charged to the ladies was mine until it was delivered. I bought the buttons used from a man in charge of the department. The charge for making the dress referred to is 4s Cd. I never denied having made the blowse. I made a silk blowse in Mr Dickson's dining room, sitting by his side. I used my own material, which I brought from Home. The stitching of the sleeves only was done in the work-room. The buttons I brought from Scotland. It took five minuted to stitch the blowse. I have a silk bodice, over-sown by an apprentice during Mr Dickson's time. The usual charge for making a bodice is 8s 6d. I never worked overtime for an employer before. Mr Dickson knew all along that I was having work done in the work-room, and he made no objection. I received a letter from Mr Dickson after I left. The first blowse mentioned in the particulars I gave to a young lady. I replied to Mr Dickson's letter, but 1 did not think it worthwhile mentioning that I paid 2s Gd for the material for the blowse. I received a second letter from Mr Dickson threatening me. I am suing Mr Dickson for .£9 los for a tweed skirt, black skirt, and paper patterns. 1 paid Mr Dickson for the tweed skirt at the time I paid him for the blowse. The black skirt I brought from Home, aud made in my own time. I have no receipts for monies paid, and Mr Dickson knows this or he would not have brought this case. Tho patterns in the dress room are all mine. I do not know how many there are. They would be of no value to anybody but me. By Mr Beard: The patterns I refer to were brought out by me from Scotland, and should be of no use to anybody else. The value of them to me is a good deal more than £B. There were never any restrictions placed on me. I was m charge of the dressmaking department. I have worked overtime many times, and haye never been paid for it. The blowse produced was made by me. I paid for two dozen buttons. I had none of the whalebone for which I am charged. Mr Dixon pressed me to stay when I was leaving. It was when he found I would not stay this difficulty arose.

ByMrPownall: When I left the workroom I did not know that I was going to return. When I came downstairs Mr Dickson spoke rudely tome. I then said I would not enter the shop again. If you had felt as 1 did, and was insulted by a little brute like I was you would not have gone upstairs. I was not going to carry parcels. I was receiving £3 a week from Mr Dickson. I never fixed any date for doing work. I worked overtime because I was frequently asked by Mr Dickson. When Mr Dickson asked me to stop, he asked me to stop cintil he could get another dressmaker. 1 did not ask Mr Dickson's permission io do my work, because I was in sole charge, I received nothing for teaching apprentices. Peter Dickson, sworn, stated: lam plaintiff in this case. The defendant was in my employ. After she left I wrote to her and she replied. Miss Clark did overtime because she promised to get work done. I never asked her to de overtime. In fact I frequently warned her against it. I did not know Miss Clark was doing work for herself until after she left. E was never paid for the material for a blowse as alleged by Miss Clark. The black skirt for which Miss Clark claims was made in my time and with my material. The tweed for the tweed skirt was purchased from me. There are no patterns in my shop which I can trace as belonging I to Miss Clark.

By Mr Beard: I cannot trace the patterns. It is usual for dressmakers to cut patterns in the room and leave them there. J believe Miss Clark has worked overtime, and I have not paid he r for it. The black skirt lining is made out of my material. I believe I imported the material. The tweed skirt was made out of my material and was not paid for. I make no entry of each sales, and I have nothing to show that the material was paid for. I am charging Miss Clark for the number of buttons a blowse would take. I did not sell the buttons. The blowse wa3 not sold to Miss Clark bv me.

Lilian Russell, an apprentice in the employ of Mr Dickson, stated that Miss Clark had a bodice pattern when she came. There were a few other patterns there belonging to her. Elsie Christensen, also an apprentice, deposed that Miss Speckman had stitched some sleeves for Miss Clark.

Mrs Clark, sister-in-law of Miss Clark, called by Mr Beard, stated that Miss Clatk had brought out from Scotland a quantity of patterns, fittings, etc., which had been brought down to Jjiasterton from Pahiatua. She would think the value of the patterns \pas £IQ-

Mr Dickson, re-called by thjs Bench, stated that he assessed the value of the labour done by hjs apprentices for Miss Clark at 20s Cd, Mid Clark, re-called, stated that

the value of the labour done was not more than 6s. In the case P. Dickson v. Miss Ulaik, judgment was given for the plaintiff tor thfl sum of los, and in the counter-claim it was decided that Miss Clark visit the workshop and pick out the patterns belonging to her.