In November 1863 a case was heard in Stirling Sheriff Court regarding Alva weavers. At the time Alva was in Stirlingshire.
Sheriff Robertson, the Sheriff Substitute for Stirlingshire, heard the case of John Henderson, a manufacturer in Alva, against weavers John Campbell Senior and John Campbell Junior.
Mr Cunningham acted on behalf of Henderson while the Campbells were defended by Messers J & J Mathie, writers in Stirling.
Henderson claimed that Campbell Junior, with agreement of his father, had been contracted to work as a weaver in Hendeson’s mill for a term of three years.
Wages had been discussed and agreed upon. This all being settled, Campbell Junior began working at the mill on 6th March 1862.
He remained there until 30th June 1863 when he left, and in his complaint, Henderson claimed he had broken the terms of his contract.
He believed Campbell was bound to his employment and should return to work, finishing his term as had been initially agreed.
At the very least, he wanted him to finish the remaining part of his second year.
Campbell denied the allegations.
He told the sheriff that when he went to Henderson’s house with a view to him taking on his son, the terms set out in court by Henderson were indeed correct, but he was not prepared to accept them.
Henderson went on to tell Campbell that he was having difficulties with his apprentices and would be looking at getting proper contracts drawn up in future.
In the meantime, he wanted Campbell Junior sent to work, and he would order his foreman to give him a web.
The boy was then sent to work in Henderson’s for the time stated in court. Campbell held that at no point did he agree to the terms.
The sheriff asked Henderson to provide proof of the allegations in the petition but believed the manufacturer had failed to substantiate the statements then dismissed the complaint.
He also found Henderson liable for expenses.
Following the case, Henderson appealed against the decision and appeared before Sheriff George Moir, but he dismissed it.
Cases like these were not uncommon as verbal contracts were often seen as enough.
There was also the rule of tacit relocation, whereby a new engagement was supposed to take place in the case of a particular service, such as a house maid being employed on a 6 monthly basis, and the likes of a gardener or manager on a 12 month contract.
In the case of a weaver, once the web was completed, he was able to leave once it was finished.
Share