THE LEGAL STATUS OF SERVANT-GIRLS. 807 



fettered by one, there seems to be some doubt as to whether she can 

 make a valid contract that will bind anybody at all to pay the doctor. 

 The law is not well settled. It may be said, however, generally, that 

 she can not bind her husband, because the obligation of a husband to 

 furnish medical attendance does not extend beyond his wife and own 

 children, and he is under no obligations to provide it for a servant. 

 And, as such attendance for a servant can hardly be called a necessary 

 which the husband must provide the wife, she can not be considered 

 as his agent for the employment of the doctor. So, too, she can not, 

 as a rule, bind herself, because her identity is merged in that of her 

 husband. She is not sui juris, and has no right to contract.* But, if 

 she has separate property, the case may be different. In New York 

 she can be held liable on her separate estate, if the intention to charge 

 it is declared in the very contract, which is the foundation of the 

 charges.f The rule everywhere, however, is not the same. There is 

 a conspicuous lack of uniformity on the subject of married women's 

 rights. Some day uniformity may be obtained. If those ladies who 

 cry for the right of suffrage would shed half of their tears for a settle- 

 ment of the laws pertaining to married women, they would accom- 

 plish results worth striving for. But to return to the doctor. The 

 poor man, at present, had better take care when a married woman 

 comes to employ him for her servant, or he may be " left out in the 

 cold." 



Although not bound to furnish medical attendance and medicines, 

 it seems the party hiring is bound to furnish proper food, and to sup- 

 port the servant during her sickness or disability, so long as she re- 

 mains in his or her employ. J 



Another right which a servant-girl has, is a right to the enjoyment 

 of a good character provided she has one and the law presumes she 

 has it until the contrary appear.* There is, unfortunately, a tendency 

 on the part of a great many people to speak too freely, too thought- 

 lessly, and even maliciously, of the characters of others. The more 

 marked the inferiority in social position of the person talked about, the 

 greater the freedom with which the unbridled tongue wags ; and just 

 in proportion as the maligned person's station in life is lowlier, the 

 injury done is the more irreparable. So it frequently happens that the 

 character of one who has lived in a menial relation to us is spoken 

 slightingly of, in a manner not justified by the facts. Thoughtlessness 

 of the consequences of idle words, revenge for some act of the servant, 

 or some other motive, may be at the bottom of it, but they afford no 

 justification. The law protects her or will, if she has cash enough 

 to invoke its protection, or can persuade a lawyer to take her case on 

 speculation. If, however, the communication is made by a person 

 acting honestly and without actual malice, then, even though it be 



* Sctaouler on Hus. and Wife, 123. \ 22 N. Y., 450. 



\ 2 Story on Contr., g 1,297, 1,298. * Starkie on Libel and S., p. 19. 



