Joseph Campbell Preserve Company v. Holcomb

Decision Date09 May 1903
Docket Number13,099
Citation67 Kan. 48,72 P. 552
PartiesJOSEPH CAMPBELL PRESERVE COMPANY v. W. A. HOLCOMB
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Decided January, 1903.

Error from Wyandotte district court; E. L. FISCHER, judge.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

CONTRACT--Employer and Employee--Proof of Satisfaction of Employer Necessary. A contract of employment at a salary of seventy-five dollars per month and traveling expenses provided that should the employee continue his services for an entire year, and should the character of his business as to volume, etc., and his manner of conducting it be satisfactory to the employer, the latter would make the salary equivalent to one hundred dollars per month by the payment of the twenty-five dollars excess at the close of the year, the determination of which should be left entirely to the employer. In an action to recover the excess salary held, that satisfaction of the employer at the end of the year must be proved.

Lathrop, Morrow, Fox & Moore, and McAnany & Alden, for plaintiff in error.

George W. Littick, for defendant in error.

BURCH J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

BURCH, J.:

An offer of employment was made by a letter in the following terms:

"CAMDEN N. J., April 27, 1899.

"Mr. W. A. Holcomb, care of Gable, Johnson & Jones, Kansas City, Mo.:

"DEAR SIR -- We have your letter of the 23d, and we notice that you are like the old chickens in your desire to return to the original hen-roost, to perch upon a comfortable stick, placed there for the convenience of all those old sons who desire to return for the killing of the fatted calf.

"Seriously speaking, after reading your letter we would say, that it arrived at an opportune moment, as we were about making arrangements for the working of a certain territory on the Missouri river, and your letter caused us to hesitate in the completion of our plans, and to consider you in connection therewith.

"Now, we have talked this matter over in confidence among ourselves, and we have reached the conclusion that if you can take up this work with a positive intention of making yourself amenable to the rules and discipline in force in the conduct of our business, there is no reason why you should not be able to make for yourself a good position, and prove a valuable employee to us.

"The whole thing, however, hinges upon your determination to do as we direct and to avoid such complications as you tied us up in formerly, during your previous connection with our house. Unless this can be clearly understood, we are frank to state that we would not for one moment consider putting you on as our representative, because we believe that the disgruntlement of the trade and the dissatisfaction caused thereby hurts and hurts hard, and for a long time, the house which practically stands behind, and is morally responsible for, the actions of its salesmen.

"Now, we make you this proposition: We are willing to engage you upon a salary of $ 75 per month and your traveling expenses, and further state that if your connection continues with us for the period of an entire year, and the character of your business as to volume, etc., and the manner of your conducting it is satisfactory to us, we are willing to make this salary equivalent to $ 100 per month by the payment of the $ 25 excess at the close of the year, under the conditions named. The determination of this you must leave entirely to us, and you must judge as to the honor and integrity of our house as to whether we are entitled to this much confidence from you or not.

"Another feature is that we do not desire any entanglements such as drawing money from Sauer or any one else, and having them deducting from their remittance. We will keep you properly supplied with funds for necessary purposes from this end, upon proper request from you, with time necessary to get the money to such points as you may name, and we shall notify Mr. Sauer as well, to the effect that we do not wish him to make any advances to you and consider us in any way responsible for the adjustment thereof.

"Now, the present territory that we would wish you to cover we would mention as follows: Leavenworth, Lawrence, Topeka, Salina, Hutchinson, Wichita, Independence, Coffeyville, Parsons, Fort Scott, Pittsburg, Springfield, Fort Smith, Oklahoma City, Guthrie, and then we will probably move you to Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and Denver, and may consider sending you to the slope. All this, however, can be arranged later, as we have given you in the above-named points an ample territory to work for some little time to come.

"You are acquainted with our line -- you know our soups, the sale of which has grown phenomenally, and when we tell you that in about 30 days we shipped to one point, New Orleans, about 10,000 dozen of these goods, you can form some impression of how they are taking.

"We are also packing mince-meat...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Campbell v. Hart
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 1953
    ...limited to transactions involving personal taste and preference. All this follows from the decision in the case of Campbell (Preserve) Co. v. Holcomb, 67 Kan. 48, 72 P. 552. In the following cases the principles upon which Campbell (Preserve) Co. v. Holcomb was determined were applied to tr......
  • Dickey v. The Coffeyville Vitrified Brick and Tile Company
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • April 9, 1904
    ...Andis v. Personett, 108 Ind. 202, 9 N.E. 101.) The condition in this contract is different from that before the court in Campbell v. Holcomb, 67 Kan. 48, 72 P. 552. In that case the agreement was that an employee receive as salary a stated sum per annum and twenty-five dollars a month addit......
  • The Superior Motor Company v. The Chevrolet Motor Company of Kansas City
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • January 6, 1923
    ...for all cases in which payment of reward is left to the will of the person offering it, by the decision in the case of Campbell v. Holcomb, 67 Kan. 48, 72 P. 552. accepted the following proposition to employ him as a commercial traveler: "Now, we make you this proposition: We are willing to......
  • Hollingsworth v. Colthurst
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1908
    ... ... this follows from the decision in the case of Campbell v ... Holcomb, 67 Kan. 48, 72 P. 552. In the following ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT