PAPER IN SHOES.

Hokitika Guardian, 18 May 1926, Page 1

PAPER IN SHOES.

AN APPEAL DISMISSED. WELLINGTON, May 14

The fine nature of distinctions included in the legislation which protects the New Zealand public from the sale of shoddy footwear was emphasised in an appeal to the Supreme Court before his Honor Mr Justice Reed to-day hv Halleiistcin Brothers, Ltd., from a conviction and fine of £5 by Mr E. Page, S.M., on a charge of exposing shoes for aile without having a statement of the material comprising the soles stamped or compressed in the actual surface of the solo of each shoe, as provided by the Footwear Regulations Act of 1913. Mr 0. A. Berendson, appearing on behalf of the respondent (Rowland Thomas Bailey, Inspector of Factories). explained the Act, which stipulated that unless the sales were of leather without admixture or addition the materials comprising them, should he stamped on the soles. Sole was defined i.n the Act as all that part of the shoe which in use is under the foot of the wearer, including insole and outsolo and liccl and heel stiffener.

Mr A. W. Blair, for the appellants, said that the artificial definition of sole in the Act made the stiffener of the heel part of the shoe. In the particular shoe which was the cause of the prosecution there was a substantial leather stiffener, but there was placed inside the leather stiffener brown paper lining.

His Honor: The question is whether the insertion of paper inside the leather stiffener is a breach of the section f Mr Blair: Yes. but in view of the fact that there is a substantial leather stiffening a statement on the “sole” that it was composed of leather and paper would give the public a wrong idea of the value of the shoe.

The Inspector of Factories stated in evidence that paper would tend to sag and alter the shape of the heel in wet weather. Its insertion was common in the case of imported footwear, hut it was not inserted to his knowledge in any New Zealand made shoes. His Honor said that on the face of it lie could see no harm in adding thin brown paper to the leather stiffening. In the case of a lady’s shoe, used often in wet, the presence of paper would, no doubt, he harmful. Mr Berendson : The idea of the Act is to enable the public to choose for themselves whether they will have allleather goods or not. His Honor remarked that il the insertion of such paper was known to he harmful the Department could obtain plenty of evidence of the collapse of shoes on that account. It seemed to him that the Act should he administered reasonably.

Technical evidence of a number of witnesses was taken, after which the appeal was dismissed.