A LAUNDRESS'S WEDDING GARMENT.
At the Clerkenwell County. Court an amusing case was heard in which a laundress, Maria Flowers, of 412 Caledonian road, was the plaintiff in an action to recover £1 183, the value of dress materials, from Lily Irwin, of 6 Brandon road, King's Oross, dressmaker. ■ ■■■■■..
Mr Thomas Clarke was for the plaintiff, and Mr Esmonds for the defendant. The plaintiff's case was that in May last she was invited to a wedding, and, being anxious to be prettily dresßed, she called upon the defendant with sixteen yards of serge and lining to match, valueN£l 18s, which she instructed the dressmaker to make into a smart frock. When it wa ß brought homo plaintiff examined the contents of the parcel, containing two skirts, a bodice, and the details of two other bodiceß in pieces. Referring to the disjointed fragments, plaintiff said to the email boy who brought the paicel f « Wot is there 'ere?" lnesmallboy said : " I don't know nothink." —(Laughter). Mr Edmonds (to plaintiff): You dWt approve of the dress ?
Plaintiff: I should think not. I oould make one better myself. Mr Edmonds: Is that the reason why you went to the defendant? -' Plaintiff: I went to the defendant 'cos J. thought she could do it better than me ; but, lor bless me, she ain't no dressmaker.— (Laughter.)
Mr Edmonds: What is the fault you find with the dresses ?
• Plaintiff: Fault? They're full ot faults. Uae skirt is two inches longer on one side than the'other. Why, it's lopsided. I amt going to a wedding in a thing o' that kind. Not me !—(Laughter.) Mr Edmonds : Is that all you oomplain-of Plaintiff: Ain't that enough? I wanted it perfect.
Mr Edmonds: What's wrong? This bodice ? s
Plaintiff: It don't fit right. Mr Edmonds: But can't that be altered? Plaintiff: No, not fit for a lady, nor no woman as I know.—(Laughter.) Continuing her evidence, plaintiff said she had not paid the defendant a penny, and did not mean to.
Judge Meadows White : The claim is for an imporfectly-made dress, and, as far as I can see, it is spoiled. Mr Edmonds: Yes, imperfect, but capable oF alteration. The necessary alteration will cost only a shilling or two. Catherine Maria Sharpe, practical dressmaker, said Bhe had been called in to examine the dresses, and found them all spoiled. bkirts and bodices and hall; it were shameful."—(Laughter.) Mr Edmonds: But couldn't you alter them to suit the plaintiff's figure? Witness: No: I ivoulJn't take it on at no price. It s a knockout.—(Laughter.) You don t understand nothink of ladies' dresses —(Laughter.) Mr Edmonds: Look at this bodice. What is the fault you find in the cutting ? Witness : Does your wife dress like that ? (ram.-(Laughter.) Look at this Bleeve ; its cut all wroug. It ain't the latest fashion.—(Laughier.) Defendant: It is the latest fashion, and don t you forget it—(Laughter.) An old lady, a charwoman, was called by the plaintiff, and said that one of the dresses was for her. She, also, was going to the wedding, and had agreed to give plaintiff 143 Gd for it, at the rate of 2* a week. Mr Edmonds : After the dresses were sent to the plaintiff did you not call upon Mrs Irwin and ask her to lend you 3s'— (Laughter.) Witness : Me hask her for 3s ? It's false. —(Laughter.)
Mr Edmonds: And when she refused, didn't you swear at her ?
Witness : I never used a bad word in all my natural.—(Laughter.) I called on the defendant to see about some washing. The Judge said that if the plaintiff would return the dresses he would give judgment for the amount claimed, with costs. The plaintiff gave this undertaking, and received judgment in her favor.
Permanent link to this item
A LAUNDRESS'S WEDDING GARMENT., Evening Star, Issue 10446, 16 October 1897, Supplement