60 



HORTICULTURE 



REFLECTING ON ONE'S EM- 

 PLOYEE WITHOUT PROOF. 

 The followliiK letter, from n Roches- 

 tor, N. Y.. reader. Introtlmc-- a some- 

 what novel and very inten'SthiK ques- 

 tion:— 



Illillll-HIIT, N. Y. 



K.>r 111.' Ii.iictli I'f inir>.-l\.> iiiitl oilier 

 n-mliTs. nliin <lii vi.u iliink i.r I Ills"; Wo 



linve iMi-n v.tv n ' ' ni\<\ vcxt-d for 



iinirly ii yiMr li> i "f "i"' of our 



«iil>-»nn>n III- " i.ili- "lul In n-- 



*. ..ti t<i >:r»i\v worse. 



i< 'Irlnklni: liiibltH In- 



J .iir liiiHliii'^s In IiIh 



I us Into fuarl iifli>r 



.! lur BOi>il cnslMiners. 



\\ ii; lis wo (lid liocuueo 



l>. II wlioii solier, liiid n 



I ' iipnn lilin and wnk 



:i III' of mir llrni. 



ll..uv\ir. Ill ».iN liiipllriili'd In II piir- 

 liriiliirly dlsEriio'ful sii'iif In (lik'UKO dur- 

 Ini; Ancust iinil wr roiilil no lontor rofrnln 

 from dtscliiirBliii; lilni. IIo loft our cni|iIoy 

 Sopli'iiilii-r Isl. Tlie condition In wlilcli lie 

 loft Ills liuslness In Ills torrllory was so 

 ontrnKOons thai we sont to nil onr cun- 

 toiuors a letter wLlcb wns probiilily sharper 

 than wo would have sent had wo not hoon 

 so exasperated. In It we staled Hint "our 

 liuslness In your territory has greatly 

 sulTored by reason of the unfortunate per- 

 sonal habits of our former sali-snian, Mr, 

 , whom we have now discharged." 



The salesman claimed that tills damaged 

 Ills reputation very badly, nnd that the 

 publicity which It carrlod prevented hlin 

 from getting two positions. His attorney 

 Is Ihreatening to bring suit against us for 

 defamation of cliaracter, wllii a view, we 

 fe*'!. of compelling us to take hliu on again. 

 We would appreciate your opinion as to 

 wlieiher he has any case. 



Yours truly, 



R. B. C. & Co. 



The salesiiiiin has no case whatever 

 if his former employers ran prove 

 what they said about him. If it is 

 true that he has "unfortunate personal 

 habits." and that those unfortunate 

 personal habits did upset business in 

 his territory, and if both lliese facts 

 can be proven in cotirt. the salesman's 

 case will go up in smoke. It is funda- 

 mental that in a civil action to re- 

 cover damages for libel, the person 

 sued can always defend on the ground 

 that what he said was the truth. No- 

 body can be unjustly damaged by the 

 truth. 



It is different where the action is a 

 criminal one. It this salesman was 

 threatening to arrest his employers 

 for libel, instead of suing them for 

 damages, they would be in position 

 to worry more about it. because in 

 many States the truth of the charges 

 is not a defense in an action for 

 criminal libel. True or not, it is still 

 libel, and the defendant can go to 

 jail for it, even though he spoke th§ 

 absolute truth. In fact, everybody has 

 heard the proverb, "the greater the 

 truth, the greater the libel," The 

 theory at the bottom of criminal libel 

 is that the offense consists not in say- 

 ing false things about one's neighbor, 

 but in stirring up that neighbor to a 

 breach of the peace. This has always 

 been the law as to criminal libel, but 

 the courts are coming more and more 

 to take the view that if the thing said 

 was true, and particularly, if there 

 was a good reason for saying it. 



neither civil nor criminal action will 

 lie. 



Kmployers are often much too care- 

 loss In what they sny about their em- 

 ployees, A manufacturer well-known 

 to me detected or thought he delocled. 

 one of his omployecH stculing from 

 him. Without calling the man to 

 hlni and seeing If he had any extenu- 

 ating circuinslnnces to present, he 

 culled him In before his office force 

 and denounced lilni in the most vio- 

 lent way as a thief. The man denied 

 it llally and defied his employer to 

 show that he had stolen anything. 

 This the manufacturer was unable to 

 do, In a way which amounted to legal 

 proof. The employee at once sued for 

 heavy damages and the manufacturer 

 had to conipnimise for a substantial 

 sum. 1 1 was wholly unnecessary. 

 The employer should have waited un- 

 til he knew he could jirove what he 

 said; then he would have been safe in 

 saying it. 



In another case the general man- 

 ager of a jobbing concern left and 

 started in business for himself. A bit- 

 ter feud developed, in the course of 

 which the ex-manager sent out a 

 notice to the trade that his former em- 

 ployer had been guilty of short weight 

 practices while he was with him. The 

 jobber at once entered suit for dam- 

 ages and when the case was tried the 

 former manager utterly failed with his 

 Iiroofs, He could not prove what he 

 had charged, and a verdict for $3,500 

 was rendered against him. What he 

 charged would not have been libel if 

 he could have proven it. 



Sometimes the statements of an 

 < luployer about an employee, made un- 

 der proper circumstances, are pro- 

 tected for another reason — because 

 they are privileged. A is a book- 

 keeper for B, but is discharged for in- 

 competency and dishonesty. He ap- 

 plies to C for a position and gives B 

 as a reference, hoping C won't ask B 

 about it. C does ask B and is told 

 that A was discharged for incom- 

 petency and dishonesty. This if un- 

 true is gross libel, and B would be in 

 for all sorts of trouble. And even if 

 true. B might be arrested for criminal 

 libel, were it not that under such cir- 

 cumstances the statement was what 

 the law calls privileged. In other 

 words, B had a right to make it, and 

 he can neither be arrested nor com- 

 pelled to pay damages. 



The law holds the reputation of an 

 employee, or anybody in business, 

 tenderly, and regards as a grievous 

 offense any statement which unduly 

 reflects upon it. This should be added 

 to one's fundamental rules of busi- 

 ness: never to say a seriously dis- 

 l)araging word about anybody else's 

 honesty, or integrity, or credit, or 

 competency, unless one has in his 

 possession then, sufficient proof of its 

 truth, 



[Copyright, September, 1915, by 

 Elton J. Buckley.) 



JimiiMry K, 19IG 



Flower Market Reports 



I'loBoly. The cut of roses and carna- 

 tions has been rather light but the 

 iiuallty averages well and the best 

 stock brings liigli prices. With the gen- 

 eral shortage even second and third- 

 rate carnatloiiB demand fair prices, 

 Lily of the valley Is scarce and firm, 

 ami orchids are not overly plentiful, 

 tiardenias are In light supiily also. As 

 for the (lowering plant trade an excel- 

 lent Christmas buglncss was enjoyed, 

 but the offerings are still fairly plenti- 

 ful, and the stock Is fine for the most 

 part. Fine cyclamen Is shown and the 

 late azaleas are in good demand, also 

 heather, which appears in considerable 

 variety. A few poinsettlas are still to 

 be seen and begonias and primulas 

 maintain their popularity well. Froe- 

 sias were a little late In appearing, and 

 the cold weather has set them back 

 again, but a good cut Is expected In a 

 few days. 



Business last week 



WASHINGTON was very satisfac- 

 tory. A large num- 

 ber of dinners and other entertain- 

 ments have enabled the retailers to 

 utilize such flowers and plants as were 

 left over after the Christmas rush. The 

 New "year's Day trade was reported as 

 better than last year to a slight extent. 

 Lily of the valley has been in large de- 

 mand. The sale of American Beauties 

 and Richmond roses fell off consider- 

 ably and there are large quantities of 

 these coming in. Pink roses have been 

 scarce and these clean up daily. There 

 is a large supply of violets. Carna- 

 tions are not now moving very well. 

 All of the local growers of roses seem 

 to have had these on crop at the same 

 time and there has been almost a glut. 



VISITORS' REGISTER. 



Cincinnati: 

 Ohio, 



Mr, Straebley, Loraine, 



Philadelphia: W. F. and Adolphus 

 Gude, Washington, D, C. 



San Francisco — Mark Ebel, Sacra- 

 mento, Calif,: Mr. Shirt, Napa, Calif, 



Chicago: A. J, Stahelin, Kedford, 

 Mich,: Julius Koenig, City Forester, 

 St. Louis, Mo. 



Pittsburgh. Pa.: Alexander Milton, 

 New York; Julius Dilhoff, Schloss 

 Bros,, New York, 



Boston: F. R. Pierson, Tarrytown, 

 N, Y,; W, A. Manda, South Orange, 

 N. J,; C. S, Strout, Biddeford, Me, 



Washington, D. C: E. L. Tanner, 

 Richmond. Va,; G. Krouwell, Sassen- 

 heini, Holland; .Milton Alexander, New- 

 York; I, Rosnosky, rep, H, F. Michell 

 Co., Phila.: Julius Dilloff, New York; 

 Joseph J. Goudy, rep, H, A, Dreer, 

 Phila. Pa, 



Stillwater. N. Y. - William R, Phil- 

 lijis is preparing to open a shop here 

 for the construction of greenhouses. 

 He will be assisted by his two sons. 



