FURNITURE TRADE DISPUTE

Gisborne Times, Volume IX, Issue 871, 22 April 1903, Page 3

FURNITURE TRADE DISPUTE

Pur Press Association. AUCKLiiMi, lasi mgs'11l I,in: ilUi.il me Hi »p'*te, mans.- minir oil a ques'.ion a.-...eii .11 ( 1 1 < ■ ■ amiliai i 'll, .1 '.(eve; -..u.i ( 'C-' cates were ism.ed to mcome I >m ■ “'/ " lor ... 1 x moil lus ami mu Jl ''' 1 ‘ norWlths,.aiming till.: lies avail! mmmu. iiuuu mam . Air m'.mpueii, lLur, Saul Urn 1 metopes eleul.v derstood mat ever;, mmg m 1,1 - award expired wnun mu new awa. ■was maun. U ii ; s empiop.m ; been aware oi >He view Uuam b.. Juuiie Cooper, liiat Uie was,.".-. 01 mm Jim. previously caimng lm; “ wae,u were iiol. iiim.euiaia Jj 1 1 raised pUMillg a Si;Lticmenl, mu, 0...oi ilio luui would have »>' 1 “ CU inf d ilo,mr .said there were two rates one for comdOtunt iaeii, ; cUi £ those miaiile to earn me in.n.umm wane. 'i he wage mr competent men was raised ny ihe awaid. 1 not certain man me old agreement as ufwiana u. anamm in ioree the clause Ueilin dissiuniu to the clause in U.e other agruemuus t\rr Tom pointed odt Uial me uuargu was not concerning uicompuie.u ns ■Ur Tyson, .secretary oi tne 1 lllUs trial Union, in cross-examination, was ashed did not Messrs h.mim. ier to tawo l»nu men uack imul dispute was adjusted at me. wages paid under the old agreement on rteviuiig a written undertaking Uuil • would not he a hreaeli oi Uie Air Tyson replied that nothing () i t In.- kind look place. 'l'aere was m«tlimg m me award aiiimt a emu mi tee living the wage mi: "‘eninpi Imm men, him liiat was Uie coinliiomstnst Vl “ w - Pater.

Thu in nil lure I null' case was continued before Hie Arbitration Come to-day. Mr Tysim, seeieliuy '>. FiirmtiiiT Jni/usi rial Linen, pn.uuiw with Ilia evidence. '1 lie e\u.clice >1 .several workmen was alsu deali-, closine tin: ease against tlie employers. Mr (Jump..ell, addressing La-' LouU i'or (tie employers, contended unit Lie applications did not disclose a nruten ei(her or the award or of the Ac,. Nothin; in liie Act made il C(,mpuisory Ini' an employer to etmtiiuie m Ins eiiiiil'iymeiii any nan. 1 h '- uhole limliiiß depended whether l».e discharge of the men was legal 01. uJlis Honor said ilull in common law there was nothin,!; to prevent, a.i employer irom lockin; onl all his men. or to preveul the men from striking, bin he asked if under Ihe New ’/.calami Ael, there.. was noUnn; to prevent an employer Ineking Lie men onl. * Mr Campbell said Uial an employers rich I to employ or disetiai rye whom he pleased was not aiieeien by liie New /ea land Arbitral ion law, while a. dispute vvvas not pending. Mr Collar also addressed the Court; con I cntl i lie; that the charge did not, disclose any oiicnce, and the evidence did not show that, an oli'cnee had lieen com in 11, ted. The application that Unit Court should declare a cerlain thin; a hreaeli of award, and ashing if or the inllict ion of a penally mi a prior commission of such a hreaeli, was si alter Tin; io anyone accustomed, to the administration of the iaW. ■' Tie Court, then adjourned.