24 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEERS 



misappropriated the money remitted. The judge left it to the 

 jury to say whether the plaintiff had been guilty of any 

 wrongful and improper misappropriation of the moneys 

 entrusted to him by the defendant, or of any wrongful or 

 improper disobedience of orders. This was held to be a 

 proper direction, but the report does not say whether the 

 plaintiff was successful or not (Smith v. Thompson, 1877, 

 8 C. B. 44). 



There are no cases in the books in which the conduct of a 

 station engineer has been called in question, but it is pre- 

 sumed that any negligence on his part which might lead to 

 the cessation of the supply would afford good ground for 

 dismissal. Under this head, absence without leave or 

 a gross breach of the rules would probably justify dis- 

 charge without salary, or salary in lieu of notice. (As to 

 negligence on the part of a station engineer, see Chap. V., 

 12, post.) 



18. Measure of damages for wrongful dismissal. It is 

 important for anyone who is wrongfully dismissed from a 

 permanent post to remember that he must not remain idle, 

 and expect the Court to order the employer to pay all that he 

 was bound to pay under the agreement. He must endeavour 

 to find similar employment elsewhere ; and the damages will 

 then be ascertained by subtracting what he actually earns 

 from what he would have earned had his original employ- 

 ment continued. In a case already mentioned (Storey v. 

 Fulham Steel Works, 1908, 23 T. L. R. 306), a manager, em- 

 ployed for five years, was dismissed after two years and eight 

 months, at a time when he was earning 400 a year. In 

 estimating damages, the judge said that, judging fairly 

 between the parties, the plaintiff might earn 250 a year. 

 That meant he would sustain a loss of 150 a year, which 

 for two years and four months came to 350 in all. The 

 employer was accordingly directed to pay that sum. (See also 

 MacdoneUv. Marsden, 1884, 1 C. & E. 281.) 



Alteration in the constitution of the employer's firm may 

 amount to dismissal, giving the employee a remedy in 

 damages. So where a manager was employed for a fixed 

 period of two years by a firm consisting of four partners, the 

 agreement provided that he could be discharged on a month's 

 written notice, in which case the employers were to pay him 



