BACK-DOOR TOUTS.

Evening Star, Volume 12869, Issue 12869, 19 July 1906, Page 8

BACK-DOOR TOUTS.

A JUDGE'S SCATHING REMARKS. . ' At ,, Brea **» r ;l County Court the- other: ciay Messrsl Leicester and Co.-,-credit jewelers, .of .York street, Twickenham, sued Harriet Lane,, a cook, of Walpole House bi. Georges road, Twickenham for 30s' this being six monthly instalments of se' each in respect of a watch for which defendant signed a contract to pay £3 10s from tho evidence «t appeared that the usual procedure had been adopted of calling at the house- where defendant was -em°ployed, and inducing her to sign an agre e : roent to purchase the watch, which William Ligns, plaintiffs managing clerk, said might be bought for £2 5s cash. ; Defendant repented of her bargain, and sent the watch back. It was returned, and defendant and a friend then took it to plaintiffs' office and Jolt it. In cross-examination Biggs said a letter demanding payment was sent to the defendant. It bore the name of Mr Winch, solicitor, but was actually signed bv a clerk in the plaintiff firm's emplov. Winch was a solicitor "attached to the "firm." Tho Judge (surprised): A sort of servant? Witness: Yes; paid a wage. In the course of an exhaustive judgment. Judge Howland Roberts said: Tliis is a cage where a domestic rcrvant is solicited to buy a iratch by a person who calls at her master's back door and sees her when sbs is busy and at a time when she may at any moment be called by her master. "She is told the watch is worth £3 15s, and that sho can have it for £5 10a. What is the position of a woman under these circumstances? She is hurried' into signing a con-' tract of which she does not appreciate the effect, and by which she is to pay a large sum for a pereon in her position. Having thought tho matter over,, she concludes the watch is not a thing she wants. One's knowledge of this sort of business enables one to csay that the price charged is enormously larger than the watch could be bought for cash. The watch was taken back, and left with the pkintfffs. Plaintiffs retained the watch, talcing up the attitude that the defendant had signed the contract, and they threatened her with all the rigors of the law. Happily, the law is not so cast-iron bound as to be unable to do justice in cases where it is called upon to see something behind the letter of the bond. The plaintiffs are not entitled to say, under the circumstances, tbr.it the contract is one by which the defendant can be held and bound. There will therefore le judgment for the defendant. His Honor added that tho conduct of Mr Winch was not before him, but for a gentleman belonging to aa honorable profession to be in tho position in which it was said Mr Winch was seemed to crave for very serious attention on the part of the Law Society. He also regretted that the amount of the claim did not allow him to grant, solicitor's costs.