Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE BARBER'S RIGHT TO TALK

The freedom of barber shop oratory has been upheld, says the "Christian Science Monitor." Let gag rule prevail -in halls of Parliament, and censorship delete the meat from overseas dispatches, and pressure be applied by the wealthy and influential on newspapers, there still remains a haven of free speech, a spot where the art of harangue may be pursued unthreatened and unhampered; a corner where the gift of gab may be exercised to the ultimate garrulousness—the little barber shop around the corner!

Yes, Tony may flail the air with descriptive gestures while denouncing democracy and upholding Fascism, he may tweak the nose and bear down on the Adam's apple, he may derange the tie, pluck pencils from the vest pocket, pour boiling water into the hot towel, or rub turpentine into the epidermis.

The case in point involved a man who, while laughing at a barber's joke, cut his hand on the barber's razor, Justice Nicholas M. Pette of the New York Municipal Court held that the barber is quite within his rights who talks while he works, in fact is acting "in a manner quite Within the usages of the art in vogue since the dark days of ages last."

The case was styled Armin Vann versus Rose lonta, and in it Mr. Vann charged that while he. was being shaved by James Casciello, an em-

ployee of the establishment otherwise known as Jimmie, the barber "started to fool around" and began "wisecracking and tickling him," continuing in this wis% despite admonitions, and so causing the plaintiff to be in "a continuous state of laughter, uncontrolled." Finally the plaintiff, it was charged, jumped tip, and his hand came in contact with the razor.

Denial was entered by the defendant to the tickling charge, whereupon Justice Pettc, in a seventeen-page decision, found tho mishap was "an unavoidable accident"; that "barbers usually have n tendency to 'fool around' with customers," and that if a customer cloos not answer n loquacious barber, ho may "Ipso facto, be treated as a cranky atmtomcr, which may so reflect upon the smooth cutting quality of the razor us to produce a shave half pulled and half scraped, so that the face may smart for days."

"If you speak nl an unopportune moment," the decision continues, "you may flirt with injury, or at least with a mouthful of soap that vill be far from appetising. If you seek a compromise by winking, maybe intending thereby to tell the barber to shut up, the wink may have the opposite effect, Cor the barber may think that Ihe customer is encouraging him in his discourse."

It was said in icgal quarters that the case was the first of its kind in the history of the New York courts.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19360125.2.174.7

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 21, 25 January 1936, Page 26

Word Count
465

THE BARBER'S RIGHT TO TALK Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 21, 25 January 1936, Page 26

THE BARBER'S RIGHT TO TALK Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 21, 25 January 1936, Page 26