Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BRITISH POLITICS.

[United Press Association—By Electric (Austialian Press Association) LONDON. January 2?. Kingsley Wood pressed Gripps directly to answer whether the bill would have legalised the 192(5 general strike. Gripps: “In my opinion under this bill the 192(5 strike would be illegal, because though it was to some degree, the i'utlienmee of the trade dispute, yet looking at the substance of the matter as llie bill demands J have no doubt the court would have held the primary object was not industrial and that therefore the strike was illegal.” The Trade Union La bounties listened to this admission with interested silence. The second reading was carried by 277 to 250.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19310129.2.52

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 29 January 1931, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
110

BRITISH POLITICS. Hokitika Guardian, 29 January 1931, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICS. Hokitika Guardian, 29 January 1931, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert