MAY A GROOM WEAR A MOUSTACHE?

Evening Post, Volume XLI, Issue 103, 2 May 1891, Page 2 (Supplement)

MAY A GROOM WEAR A MOUSTACHE?

At the Bedford County Court Judge Bagshawe tried a case in which a groom named Brightwell sued Mrs. Grimshawe, of Goldington Grange, near Bedford, for £o wages and damages for wrongful dismissal from her service. Mr. Stimson, solicitor for the plaintiff, said the groom was engaged in September last, and at that time had no moustache. On June 7 he received a month's notice to leave, but soon afterwards had an attack of inflammation of the lungs. By his medical man's advice he grew a moustache, which gave great umbrage to Mrs. Grimshawe, and she ordered him to shave off the hirsute appendage, which was then in an incipient stage. He then made no reply, but on the 25th refused to obey the order, and for this disobedience the defendant dismissed him ten days before the notice expired. Mrs. Grimshawe conducted her own case, and said that since 1854 there had never been such a thing as a moustaohed servant in her establishment, and she would not tolerate it in her presence. When she first saw the plaintiff he did not show the slightest suspicion of a moustache, or she would not have thought of engaging him. Her contention was that she was justified in dismissing a liveried servant for wilful disobedience. The Judge held that it must be disobedience to any lawful or reasonable command. He could understand that it would not be suitable for a powdered footman in white silk stockings to wear a moustache, and that it would be an outrage for a man in leather topboots to wait at table ; but a groom was an outdoor servant, and a mous r tache was a natural protection against the weather. He was of opinion that for a coachman to wear a mous- ' tache was not 30 much at variance with the usages of society as to make it unreasonable for the man to disobey an order to remove it d,uring the ten days that remained of his service. Judgment was given for plaintiff, with costs on the £5 scale.