HOW BUNGTOWN WAS SO NAMED.

Otago Witness, Issue 2813, 12 February 1908, Page 36

HOW BUNGTOWN WAS SO NAMED.

Mr D. Murray writes with reference to Mr J. Maclennan's article, published on January 27, on how Bungtown, in the Wetherstone Ranges, first received its name. Mr Murray states that Mr Maclpnnan's description is not quite correct. In the far-off days there was but one road leading to Waipori — what is now called the Upper road. This road' was bad in summer in wet weather, but in the winter, with snow on the ground, it was impassable. At the outermost bend of the road from Wetherstones to Waipori can be seen the remains of an old sod hut. once a groe shanty. At the first bend is a track leading down the spur to where Blackman'e Gully junctions with Bungtown Creek. Further in, nearer Wetherstones, is another track going paat a rock named Pompey's Pillar. leading dowr- about the centre of the creek. No dray could be taken down either track. The gully was first worked in 1862 or 1863. Presumably the "Mick" referred to is Mick Tohill, who drove an express with the mail between Lawrence and Waipori a few years ago. Mick's father could hardly have gone to Lawrence for the beer, for there was no Lawrence then, the place being known as the Junction. Wetherstones was then the principal township, and was two miles nearer Bungtown than tl'e Junction. Besides, there were a dozen hotels in Wetherstones, while our correspondent can only remember three at the Junction — namely, Walsh s Camp Hotel, Commercial Hotel (burnt down lately), and Roberts's George HoteJ. The road between the Junction and Wetherstones, though level, was worse for draye than the road to Waipori. Our correspondent states that in 1865 he was cradling on the Molyneux River, and from an American darkey working near him he obtained the following account of how Bungtown got its name:— The creek was first " prospected by a party of American miners, who built a large sod hut for their dwelline-house. When swaggers came along about dusk they made for the hut and a*ked the Americans if there were any place handy where jhev could camp for the night. The Americans, pointing to a cornor of the hut. would tell them to " bunk down there." So one T>ro=nector told others that if they were nigh the Yanks, and it was late, they could always "bunk drvwn " in the hut: so by constant use the "bunk down" was changed to "Bungtown" Mr Murray concludes : " About 1.P67 five miners— all Londoners, — who had been working for some time in Bungtown. till they got duff e red out, came into Wetherstones and got work. One of them is at present in charae of No. 1 ihpd, Rattrav street wharf Blackmail's Gully, on the east side of Bungtown Creek, was the principal feeder of gold for the creek, there beiner no gold above in the creek where the two inept. Near the first turn on the Waipori road there is «. quartz reef laid bare across the road, but it i 3 supposed to be barren. There are still on<» or two hatters living out tliero. Bungtown Charley, who h-ad bpen livino- <""f therp for over 30 years, died in the Old Mon's Home two years ago. There are still two or three of them in the home." j

Edward Noel Craven, .2, 17-year-old company promoter who was accused at Willesden of stealing a ■watch from his father, has been discharged. It was stated that he would be sent to sea for four years.

Another motor steam fire engine for London has just been delivered to the fire briagde headquarters in the Southwark Bridge road, where it will henceforth be stationed, -»\jth steam kept up, so as to be ready for immediate turn-out. The new machine is of the " Fire King " pattern, and is the sixth engine of its type built for the metropolis. Its pumping capacity is 400 gal par minute, whilst it can run up to 30 miles an hour on the level and ascend hills with tfradients of 1 in 6. The boiler is fired with oil fuel, and a supply of this and feed-water sufficient for several hours' running is carried. The wheels are fitted with =ohd rubber tyres, those in the rear 'WI si twin secasa.

ABBITBATTOS COTTRT- j Before his Honor Mi Justice Sibi (presi- I dent), and Messrs W. Pryor (deputy representative of employers), and J. A. M'Cullough (workers' representative). The court commenced its sittings at the Supreme Coiirt on Monday. BREACHES OP AWARDS. Inspector of Factories v. the Dunedin Pork j and Poultry Company. — Breach of butchers' award by employing a young man (C. Miner) , as a small-goods butcher, and failing to pay 1 to him the award late of wages. — Mr P. Hally (inspector of awards) represented the | Labour Department, and Mr Hanlon ap- ' peared for respondents.— The Inspector said ' that lespondents vreie not butcheTS in the oidmary sense. They had goods made up, and sold them in their shop along with other articles. The company consisted of two young men, and they employed Miner on the ( understanding that if the business prospered they would increase his wages They lost money, however, and retained the young man in their employment for some 12 months at the original rate of wages.— Mr Hanlon admitted the facts. — Respondents were fined £2, and court costs, and Miner, who was chaiged with working for a lower wage than provided by the award, was also ordered to pay court costs. Inspector of Awards v. J. "Webster —Breach of furnituie-makers' award by employing Alfred Powisland, a journeyman upholsterer, on piece-work. — Mr Hewitt appeared for respondent — The Inspector explained that the award distinctly forbade piece-work or " sweating.' The facts were that Powisland went to respondent, and asked for work, and the latter agreed to give him a suite of furmtuie to upholster, and to pay him a certain price for the job when completed , it was also agreed that Powisland should get other work on the same terms. Powisland ' had absolutely no capital, but he took a j shop and commenced work. After two days, | seeing there was no chance of making a profit on his contract he gave it up, claiming £1 8s for what he had already done and for cost of materials used. — Alfred Powisland, who was sworn, said, in reply to Mr Hewitt, that if the work had paid him he would have employed labour ard carried on a regular business. — Mr Hewitt submitted there was no case to answer, as the relationship be- I tween "Webster and Powisland was not that of master and servant, Powisland being in | reality in the position of a contractor. — The court held that respondent, under the circumstances, was not bound by the award. — The case was dismissed. Inspector of Awards v. D. Robertson. — Breach of the painters' award by employing two apprentices, indentured to sign-writing, at ordinary painting work. — Respondent did not appear. — Mr Hal'y said that the breach arose from the fact that respondent em- f ployed two journeymen and four boys in 1 the ordinary work of painting. Two of these boys were properly indentured as painteTS and no exception coiild be taken in respect to them. The other two lads were apprenhces to the sign-writing, and there being engaged in ordinary painting made the number of boys employed in excess of that allowed by the award. — The court was doubtful whether the facts as set forth constituted a breach. There may have been a breach of contract, or respondent may 'have made himself liable for paying the lads a wage below that allowed to journeymen, in which capacity they were employed. A breach had been committed in taking on the sign-writing apprentices without employing an adequate number | of journeymen. — Mr Hally pointed out that sign-writers were bound by no award. — The case was dismissed, the court directing the inspector to bring another case against respondent for paying inadequate wages. H. Liddle, of Balfour, was charged with having committed a breach of the saddlers' award by paying an employee named Savage at pieoe-work rates. — Mr "VV. D. Stewart appeared for respondent. — The Inspector stated that Savage had been employed and paid on piece-work for about 12 months. He believed there were some special circumstances connected with the case — Mr Stewart said that when respondent took over the business at Balfour he signed an agreement to employ Savage for five years. There was very little to do, and Savage was not worth the weekly wage of 30s paid him. Respondent eventually became financially embarrassed, but he wa9 still forced to employ Savage, whom he eventually put on to piece-work, paying him by results. Under the circumstances respondent should have made application for a permit so to employ Savage, but had failed to do so. He thoiight a conviction only would meet the case — Respondentwwag convicted of a breach of the award, and ordered to pay the court costs. Henderson and Gray (Milton) were charged with a breach of the lime-burners' award by employing James Rowley as a limeburner, and failing to pay him the rate of wages awarded Time-burners. — Mr Donald Reid, of MiVton, appeared for respondents. — Inspector Hally said that Rowley, who should be the principal witness, could not be found, and could not therefore give evidence. Complaint had been made to the department that this man, though employed as a limeburner, was paid inadequate wages. The main question for the court to decide was whether or not Rowley was a lime-burner — Evidence at considerable length regarding the nature of the duties performed by Rowley was given by Inspectors Hally and Carmody, James Patrick Lynch, John Lynch. Joseph Robinson, and George Cooper. — Mr Reid, in opening respondents' case, said the proceedings should not have been taken by the department, the officers of which were ignorant of what lime-burning signified. To the uninitiated -it might appear that a man over 20 years of age employed! at the lime kilns was a lime-burner, but such was not the case The position of lime-burner was one involving considerable responsibility, and required many years of practical experience. It was ridiculous to call a mere boy who assisted the burners a lime-burner. Even if Rowley was strong enough to do the work, he possessed neither the experience nor the practical knowledge that would qualify him for tho position — Evidence was given by , Hugh Fitz=immons. John "Wilson, and Matthew Henderson. — The decision of the court . was reserved. , J H Chalmers, who did not appeaT, -was ■ charged with committing a breach of the i bakers' award — Inspector Hally said that the i bakers' award made no provision for an em- j ployer's son being exempted from its opera- 1 tions. Mr Chalmers was a storekeeper. ] carrying on business near Lawrence ; and baked about three times a week. Mr dial- ] mers was not a tradesman, but he employed ] his son, 18 years of age. who had had some ] Blight tuition in baking, and who ran the < whole establishment. It was contended by 1 the union officials that this was a breach of the award, and he (Mr Hally) thought it 1 w.is, seeing that the award did not exempt 1 this particular class of people, and seeing ] that a qualified man was kept out of work. 1 He did not think it was a oase calling for 1 punishment. He had a great deal of sym- 1 pathy with a man employing his own son, 1 and he did not for a moment suppose that t the lad's crospects were being injured by the course- his fa,ther was adopting. — The < court held t'-i&t, m view of ti>e circum.stan.ces, <

the case was not one for a penalty. A breach of award vrowldl l»s recx-^«lecl, ■wllKrlx oi course m-eant that the lad could not bd employed as heretofore. H. Milligan, of Oamaru, was charged witU a breach of the tailors' award in connection with his Palmerston establishment. — Respondent said that his representative at Palmerston had instructions to work within the award. but had been practically forced into the present position through inability to get qualified hands.— lnspector Hally said he thought the circumstances wera about as stated by -vlr Milligan — The President : How many appreuiices are employed? — Mr Hally: Two, and no journeymen.— Mr Milligan said he had advertised for hands on several occasions and had not been able to get them. They would not leave Dunedm to go to Palmerston or Oarrmru He was veiy sorry a breach had been committed, but there was no way out of it.— lhe court said it seemed to be a case of hardship, and in view of the circumstances a fine of £3 would be imposed, respondent ordered to pay the court cost=. T. B. Gibb, of Oamaiu, was charged with committing a breach of the bakers' award — From the circumstances, as stated by Inspector Hally and respondent, it appeared that Gibb had taken over from a man named Hepburn the bakery business formerly carried on by Mr Bee. Mr Bee had an apprentice - named Grainger, whom, at the outset, Gibb was unable to take over. Grainger left Oamaru, and was for 18 months in the employ of a baker at Waimate. On his return-, ing to Oamaru, Mr Gibb, through his solicitor, Mr Ongley, asked the permission of th» . Labour Department to take on Grainger a3 an apprentice in order that he might complete his time. The permission was given, but the present proceedings were taken because it was ascertained that prior to making application to take on Grainger, Gibb had! already taken on another apprentice. — Respondent pointed out that Mr Ongley's letter to the Department clearly stated that the legal number of apprentices were already employed —The President said there was no breach of award in the circumstances. It seemed to be a perfectly bona fide arrangement, and the Department had been consulted!about the matter. Mr Gibb was still responsib'e for the boy's apprenticeship being completed — Respondent asked for costs. — The President : We cannot give costs against the inspector. It is rather unfortunate that you. had come to Dunedin, but there was only one other Oamaru case." Irvine and Stevenson were charged with a breach of the butchers' award by employing Robert Adcock at a lowei wage than that provided for a first small-goodsman. — Inspector Hally appeared for the Labour Department, Mr Payne for respondents, and Mr Hay for Adcock. — The whole case depended on the fact of whether Adcock was or was not the first small-goodsman. — Evidence was given by Robert Adcock, W. Stevenson, J. Irvine, and! Charles Higgms. — After consideration, the President stated that the couit was satisfied on the evidence that Adcock was not a first small-goodsman. They thought that James Irvine occupied that position. It was clear on the evidence that Irvine was head of lha factory, which included the small-goods department, that he was a competent smallgoodsman himself, was paid the wage of first small-goodsman, and from time to time did actually make small-goods. Adcock was second small-goodsman, although he had not been paid the wages a second small-goodsman was entitled to, being paid £2 10s, when he should have received £2 11s. That, however, was not the charge respondent was called upon to answer, and, therefore, the case would be dismissed. — Mr Hay: The charge against Adcock will also be dismissed, I presume? — The President : Yes, but he will be entitled! to get the extra shilling per week which was due to him. — Mr Payne: We undertake to pay him that. The sitting-s of the Arbitration Court were resumed at 10 o'clock on the sth inst. GENERAL LABOURERS' UNION. An industrial dispute between the Dunedin and Suburban General Labourers' Union and the employers of Dunedin and suburbs. Mr S Boreham conducted the case for 'tho union, and MY W. Scott for the employers. The demands of the union were (1) thaff pick-and-shovel labourers should be paid 99 per day of eight hours when woking in dry places; (2) sik hours to constitute a, day's work when labourers have to stand in a wet or foul plaoe; (3) all tools to be provided by employer; (4) provisions of clauses 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 of the labourers award of 7th January, 1906, to apply to employers included in this award; (5) this award to continue in force till Ist December, 1909, and thereafter until superseded by another award 1 or industrial agreement. Philip Helon, ganger, employed by the Dunedin Drainage Board, said he received 8s 6d a day. Previous to becoming ganger he did general work — cleaning ditches, etc., at 8s a day. When receiving 8s a day he found! it was not a sufficient wage to keep his wife and family upen. A man could not live on that wage if he wished to do justice to his grocer. Some jobs in drainage work were very dirty. He had not worked to any extent in the sewers. He had never worked for builders. Big contractors paid 7s a day for pick-and-shove-1 work Witness had five men in hie gang. The work of oleaning ditches was so obnoxious and repulsive that it oughfl to be paid for at a higher rate than ordi» nary pick-and-shovel work. He did ncrf> think that 9s was too much for the work fou a. good worker. By Mr Scott: He considered that Is IJd! an hour was not too much for a competent worker. Hans Peter Stow, employee of the Dunedin Drainage Board, said he received 83 st day. He was in a different position fronM other workers as his family was grown up and in a position to 'help him. He considered that 9s a day was not too much foi» a good man. He did not know how a ma.vi could possibly live on less than 93 a day. la the maintenance gang there were iia " pointers." Witness made an extra, shilling if he 'could. If he was depending on the 8s a day — himself and his wife — he would just exist on it. William M'Donald. employee of the Dunedin Drainage Board, said h« did all kinds 3f work — cleaning up ditches, timbering, picking up meta.l, etc. He received Is vi hou* ill round. He considered that six hours a clay was quite enough for any man to worla in a 3ewer. The gaaes and smells were mosfl obnoxious At present the men worked 8J hours a day, with Saturday afternoon off. By Mr Scott: A man worked from half* past 7 to 5 o'clock in a. sewer. They did not work in two-hour shift*. "Witness had put in eight hours in a sewer. The present? custom was to have one man on top andl three men below. "William Bruce, working with pick-ancC* shovel on the Mosgiel railway duplication* trork, eaid the Government paid him Is «un bour. He 'had worked for builders wnS con> tractors at pick-and-shovel work, also ■witH the Dunedin Drainage Board. If builders* labourers were paid Is an hour those meri who were employed on a harder class of th« same work should receive 9s a day. Michael Casey, an employee of the Dunjdin Drainage Board, said he received 8a It fry foi pick-and-shovel work. He 'kiwi

■worked as a buildeis' excavator. The wori of a labourer under a contractor or under itho Drainage Board was much harder than the work of a builder's excavator.

Evidence to the same effect was given by (Martin O'Neil" (employed by the Dunedin Drainage Board). This was the case for the union.

Henr/ Butcher was the first witness called •Tjy Mr Scott on bahalf of the employers. "Witness said he v, as maintenance foreman in the employ of the Dunedin Drainage Boaid. The board employed between 90 and 100 mer. There were 15 men in the mam- I Penance gang who received Is an hour. The=e | 3nen werp employed all the year round. If called out at night they were paid overtime, j Experienced men — men who had passed an ! examination in draining — were paid Is ljd ' per hour. They were competent to drain any place in Dunedin. These men were licensed drainers, and it would not be iair to them to pay the other men as much as these men received- As a matter of fact, the3e labourers could not be called pick-and-ehovel men, because their work was of such a peculiar nature. If their wages were xaised to 9s a day, it would pay him to dispense with all the general labourers and employ all licensed diainers. of whom he could get plenty at Is l|d an hour. If the general Jaboureis were worth Is lid an hour. the. licensed drainers were worth Is 4d an hour. If the general labourers received Is l|d an hour, the licensed drainers were certainly ■worth 3.1 an hour more. Any man who lifted a pick and shovel could not be regarded as a pick-and-shovel man- A man who went into an excavation and worked at pick-and-shovel work ah day long — shifting muck irozu a big foundation or from a bank — was a pick-and-shovel man, but the men under witness in the Drainage Board's works did , not do that class of work. These men should not be brought under this cause at all. He considered that the Drainage Board should be exempted from it. It was not a fact that a man remained in a sewer for eight hours at a stretch. The custom was to have three men below and two men working the windlass on top. Tile men worked Jroo? breakfast to dinner down bolow, and then tbv men on top changed about. A man had no- right to be below any longer than a four-hour shift. It was entirely his own iault if he was there longer. The board provided the men with good, sound gumboots that reached to the thigh, and if a man worked in water that reached over them at was ±ime lac learned to swim -A. man never worked with wet feet. His Honor asked Mr Boreham if he wished clause 2 to apply genera ly. Mr Boreham lephed that that was the intention. His Honor said the difficulty was that the Court could not make it general unless they altered the existing award It seemed to aim it could not apply to pick-and-shovel ■work. Witness (continuing) said that the board •lways supplied tools to its woikmeu. j By Mr Boreham . When his men were on f construction work they were pt«id overtime, but when on maintenance work they -were paid Is, except on Sunday, when double ' tinia was paid. Witness M'Dona'd was on maintenance woik. It was at the option of. the men to woik wet or dry. If a man | went home when it was wet lie was not paid. To Mr M'Cullough: He considered that four hours was sufficient for a man to work ] in a sewer. The rest of his day should be put in above ground. George Simpson, building contractor. Dunedin. said that a good pick-and-shovel man could always command Is an hour. It would be detrimental to the interests of many elderly men if Is an hour was fixed as the miMimun Sometimes builders' labourers had to wok in wet places. Their work was not of the ea°y nature portrayed by Mr Boreham The work of a bui.ders' labourer was not lighter than that of an ordinary pick- ( and-shovel man. If the court fixed 9s a day as the wage of a geneial labourer, workmen in other trades would want an increase, j It would have a disturbing effect on the •trade of the eclony if the wages for unskilled labour were fixed at 9s a day. Mr Boreham Why do you say that' — Witness: That is my opinion. Are you aware that some of the big contractors pay ordinary labouring men 9s a, day at present' — I am not aware that any builder in this town pay_s more than the award wages. I think"ycur statement is not correct. •! Why would an increase to the general labourers have a disturbing effect 9—lf9 — If the I labouring man got 93 a day, other workeis j would consider they were worthy of an increase. Albert Cross, inspector of works, Dunedin City Corporation, saicf the municipal department employed about GO men for street-clean-ing. They weie paid 8s a day. So far as the City Corporation was concerned, it ■would be veiy difficult to satisfactorily define •when the men were do.ng pick-and-«hovel ■work ot maintenance woikCharles Wedge, town clerk. Roslyn Boiough, said hi c - council objected to the c ause referring to the pay of the pick-and-shovel men. Malcolm Stevenson, carter and general contractor, said it would be -very haid to draw a line between ordinary labourer's wcrk and the wor> of a pick-and-shovel man If the court drew a line it would lead to no end of trouble. Witness paid his road-forma-tion men Is an hour. It did not pay him •to employ men who were woith less thaa Is an hour. Mr Scott said that was the case for tho employers The employers generally weremow paying Is an hour to their men. If the court, fixed the minimum at Is. it would, ihe submitted, be unfair to elderly men. His Bonor asked what was the position of unskilled labourers not connected with the building trades? Now that the matte«•was before the court their case should be considered Mr v Scott replied that in his opinion, it ■would be proper for the court to provide for them. He would suggest /that they should be allowed lOJd. an hour as a minimum. Mr Bcreham did not address the court. His Honor . The court will consider the matter Friday, Februaht 7. .WRIGHT v. THE MILBURX LIME AND CEMENT COMPANY. Claim £318 10s, as compensation for the death of George Wright. Mr Hanlon for the claimant, Agnes Wright, ■widow of the deceased. The deceased was employed in quaming for lime for Messrs Henderson and Gray, of Milburn, contractors. On the Bth December, 1906, he was engaged in removing clay from off the face of the quarry prior to blasting operations, when a email quantity of limestone became dislodged, causing deceased to lose his footing and fall a distance of 40ft, causing injuries from which he died two days Sorter. The deceased had been in the emgrioymetnt of Messrs Henderson and Gray for about four months prior to injury. His average weekly ©axningß were £2 0a lOd. The jwidow and two children were wholly dependent on the deceased's earnings. Mr gaulon said the amount claimed had.

beer paid into court. There were two infant children to participate beside the widow, and he had to ask the court to make an order that Mr Ramsay be appointed to repiesent the infants. Order made accordingly. The court made an order that a third of the fund be paid to the widow for her use and benefit; the balance to be paid "to the Public Trustee, to be invested by him, and the full fund to bs applied at his discretion for the maintenance and benefit of the widow and children. The sittings of the Arbitration Ccurt were resumed at 10 a m. on Monday CHEMICAL MANURE WORKERS. In the dispute between the Otago and Southland Chemical Manure Workers' Industrial Union and the Otago and Southland chemical manure manufacturers, the union demanded wages for crusher-feeders, dredgers, and mixers, and permanent offal carters, 10s a day; acid workers, 9s 6d a day, phosphate baggers, casual offal -carters, 9s per day ; digester steamer, offal fillers, 8s 6d a day ; other employees, 8s 4d. Hours of labour, eight hours and three-quarters daily, with Saturday half-holiday, except for acid workers, for whom eight hours per day seven days a week, was asked, seven days' holiday on full pay to be granted each year. Tim© and a-quarter for overtime for the first two hours, and after that timie and a-half. Holidays. Christinas Day, Boxing Day, New Year's Day and the day following, the Anniversary of the Province, Good Friday, Easter Monday, Labour Day, and King's Biithday. A week's notice on either side to terminate engagement. Preference to be given to unionists. Mr Steve Boreham appeared for the union, and Mr \V. Scott for the employers. Mr Scott pointed out that the principal matter in dispute was that of wages, and said that the demands of th-e union were far in excess of what had been granted to other ■unions. There was really no case to argue. Mr Boreham wished to proceed, and, being allowed to do so, .and the men worked under extremely unpleasant conditions, and were in constant danger to life and limb. It seemed to him that an acid worker was practically a chemist, but had, in addition, to wheel coal and do other work. He was an expert, and they asked 9s 6d a day for him. They asked 9s a day for a phosphate bagger. His was a dusty job, and he did not get time to get a drink of water. They asked 9s a day for the ordinary acid workers A casual offal carrier was often up to his armpits in raw blood, and they apked for him 9s a day. For the man looking after the digester — the only man besides the foreman who understood the work — they asked 8s 6d a day. His was skilled labour, and he had to be a cooper among other things. For ordinary labour 8s 4d was asked for. The extra 4d was to cover the extra unpleasantness of the work and extra washing. Theee men were not permitted to smoke, and had not a moment to themselves. William Snowball, manager of the Dunedin Abattoirs, described the duties of the offal carter. He had to grope in filth. Hia feet were always wet. It was not an expert work, though dirty and unpleasant. He was not prepared to sa-y what would be a fair wage. Peter Gray, secretary of the union, employed by Messrs Kempthorre and Prosser (Ltd ) was a married man with three children. He paid 7s a week house rent at the Cattle Yards. Had a general knowledge of the work, and was now employed m the manure department. He had broken his leg "when at the chemical -works He had nothing to spare after paying his debts. Had heard Mr Borehajn's remarks, and believed them to be correct. The crusher was kept going incessantly, and there was no chance for a man to " point " without immediate detection. The noise was so great that conversation was impossible. There was plenty of water handy, m ca^e a man wanted a. drink. Mr Scott : How long did you take to learn to run the crusher? Witness had had no previous experience of the machine. Thiee men could work it at present. In case Mr Scott wanted to hear any more, he -. Mr Scott • I've asked you all the questions I wish, thank you. John Maclntyie, employed by Kempthorne and Prossei as a permanent offal carter, said he had to cut the fat from the offal with his naked hands. Mr Boieham I underestand that a number of carcasaos. condemned for tuberculosis, etc , aie killed there 9—9 — Yes, but I don't handle them. Witness went on to spy that his boots were rotted away once a month. Neither Chinamen nor washerwomen could remove the stains from his clothing, and he paid Id extra per piece for his laundry. He was " bachelorising," and this cost him £10 a. year His clothes came to £17 odd a year. He had been there eight years. No he was not a nice man to meet. Ladies gave him a wide beith. Mr Scott. Why have you stayed at it so long then'— Half a loaf is better than none. John Stewart, employed at Kempthorne and Prosser's as a digester woiker. was an expert from the Christchurch Meat Company, who paid him 10id and hour. The work was very disagieeable consisting of the handling of condemned meat It required experience to work the digestei He also had to cooper his casks, and pack his tallow. Jle had got the higest price for his tallow in Christchurch. He had a wife ar.d ten children. He was better off six years ago at 6s a day than he was now at 9s. He would rather take low wages than go away from home. A man in his position should be graded as a second-class certificated engine driver. The proposed payment of 8s 6d was not enough. He possessed a certificate, and every man who worked a digester should possess one. To Mr Scott: When in the Christchurch Meat Company, he was an assistant. If the management of that company stated he was unable to pack tallow they would be wiong Alexander Falls, employed at feeding the crusher at the abattors. started a-t 6s Bd, but had been raised to 7s 6d for doing special work. He was continually shovelling, also had to be watching belts and bearings, and see that nothing got choked. He had his hand jammed there. It would not be safe for boys to work there amid choking dust. To Mr Scott- He had been initiated by the engineer and then went straight on with the work. He now knew as much as the engineer. Robert Thomson, geneial acid maker, was in receipt of Ss a day He had been with Kempthorne and Proaer for 13 years. Was married with two children. The sum of 7s 6d was not sufficient to keep any one with a family. He made spirits of salts, and nitric acid when required ; also, acid of various strengths for sending away. Frederick Gough had been in receipt of 7s 6d a shift in the acid depaitment. He thought 9s a shift would not be enough. Acid "burned holes in boots and clothes. ; Alexander Roberts had been employed as foreman in the artificial manure department (Wright. Stephenson's) for seven years, he did no think Is an hour was sufficient pay for men at the mixers, even though they were practically storemen. They spent nine months in the store and three months in the manure department. This work was heavier than ftraift stew wort,

1 Mr Scott: Isn't it the other way about 9—9 — 2\o Mr Boreham: I worked in this depaitment and I confess I had to " turn my tees up." Mr Scott said evidence showed that the men were employed at oidmary labouring , work. The court had held in other disputes that conditions in Canterbury and Otago were practically the same, but the employers had given the men the Auckland agreement, a ! veiy -liberal one, and so weie rather surprised at being brought into couit These men, in evidence, were much better off than •they had been before, and received fairly liberal treatment by the company The wages were bstter, and the time more liberal than in Canterbury, where Sunday's only counted time and a-ha!f; whereas, in Otago it counted double. It would not be fair to mciease wages over and above the preserrt rate, as employers had already handicapped them- , selves, and unless Canterbury was brought into line it would not be fair on the part of the court to increase the burdens of the company. As to the question of notice, it was generally ignored by the employees, who left on a Saturday night with no notice. The employers, therefore, objected to being tied down by a one-sided agreement Preference to unionists had already been dealt with. Mr Smith drew attention to the high wages offered to youths. It was handy to have one or two about. James "William Henton, general manager for Messrs Kempthorne and Prosser, said ' it was a revelation to him to find these men classified as specialists. If these demands were conceded it would mean an additional £1000 a year in wages, which could not . be passed on to the consumer It would I be a matter of serious consideration whether I they could carry on the works. The stiffest competition was from abroad, and no increase in price was possible. Manures were com- ' ing in largely from Japan, ai.* competition might become keener. If the Japanese furthei exploited this market, it would ha\e a seiious effect .on the industry Labour in Japan was Is a day, and not for an eight-hour day either. I They would then have to give up manufaci turmg. As an industiy if requned assist- | ance rather than increased burdens It was j with great difficulty that wages had been i raised to the level of the Auckland award The work was by no means skilled. The company had invested something like £70.003 in the colony, which meant a wage sjieet of from £15.000 to £16.000 per annum Ceor K e Smith. works manager at Burnside for Messrs Kempthorue and Prosser, did not think there would have been any dispute before the court to-day if the matter had been left to the men themselves. "When dissatisfaction became apparent it was met with the Auckland agreement, which meant practically an increase of 6d a day all lound. | The men. however, had said they were in Mr l Boreham's hands, and could do nothing If this industry was burdened fuither it would pay the company better to import thenmaterial. The acid department was cairied j out under the supervision of his son. The hail da were not skilled, but it was a job to get men steady enough There had been no classification of workis in the past Mr Scott uointed out that theie was a competition between Otago and Canterbury that a rise in wages might aggravate. Mv Boieham to witness. Did you ever receive a " round robin from the men legarding an inciease three years ago 9 Witness could not remember, but would not swear to not having received it Mr Boreham Ycui son must be a lobust paity, woiking night and day. I did not say he worked night and day. You said he was in sole charge of the acid department, and that woiks night and day Witness replied that his son received assistance The work was light. Did not remember the men Baii-cl and Harris having practically struck for higher wages, and leavj ing because they would not work for 10s a day. Such things did net interest him. Mr Boreham. Yet you take an inteiest in the \>ay m Japan Yes, because we have to compete against that. Is it not a fact that Kempthorne. Piosser and Co. are piactically running a company in Canterbury, and supplying them with chemical manures ? Witness. They suvjply the Christchuich Meat Company with chemicals that company does not make. We are more afraid of competition from Jawan than from elsewheie Mr Boreham: Do you not know, sir that we are opposed to the Japanese and all thenworks and that His Honor ■ I don't see how that affects the present question. Mr Bcreham: Now. Mr Smith. I know you are a gentleman willing to pay a man a fair day's wage — Yes, and I want a fair day's work for it too. Should an intelligent woikev be brought hark to the level of an unintelligent woiker? — That's nothing to do with it Is it possible that if these men get an increase. Canterbury would come in to interfere with your business ? Witness was not considering Canteibm-y Witness in reply to other questions, thought Mr Thomson was pad a sufficient wage. If the -othe-r men got 10s Mr Thomson would be worth 15s Mr Henton, recalled, said Otago and Canterbury markets were open to all manufacturers in the Dominion. Theie was comnptitioTi therefore, between all the 'entres. His industiy was pay : ng a fair dividend. The proposed rife would mean a severe loss — To Mr Boreham • Yes, they wanted their pound of fleph. To Mr Scott The manufacturing •, oil ;<•>■> of his business was not so piofitable as the importing part. The manufacturing part would not pay the dividend. James Barber local manager of the Christchnrrh Meat Company, said be had been a&ked by his company to protest against payment of an increase of wages in Dunedin as< against Canterbury. The company's local output was less than in Canterbury. The Canterbury Company had dealings from the North Cape to the Bluff, so the manure manufacturers came into competition throughout the Dominion. His comnany desired the youth clau=e to be maintained. The work of a manure dryer was very light, and woulii scarcely "keep a boy employed, much less a man. George William Gibson, of the firm of Kimmo and Blair, said they mixed for, perhaps, five months in the year, extra men being taken on pro tsm , or. if required, for the season. The foreman got 50s a week, and the otheis 455. The Canterbury firms certainly competed with his firm. If wages were increased as proposed it would not be to the interests of Otago. Competition In Islsvd guanos must also be considered. The f r:ra of manures showed a tendency to " come back " while the raw material wa9 going up. As to the youth clause, they would be satisfied with one to three To Mr Boreham: Their men worked up to 50 hours sometimes. The men in receipt of £-2 5s a week simply mixed above ground, and in an open store. Mr Boreham : How much material do Messrs Kempthorne and Prosser supply yoi with? Mr Scott: That is a trade secret, and not 9. proper question to ask in r pen coiiit. if i Borehjym: It seeing to me tUeie *r# •0. •-„—— - 5U - -

too many of these trade secrets We've none

too many of these trade secrets We've none. Hugh Alexander Salmon, manager for the manures department of Messrs Wright, Stephenson, ar.d Co.. generally corroborated the evidence given by previous ay', in reply to Mr Boreham, said their foieman iecei\ed £2 l'2s 6cl for 49 hours' woik. Witness could not make any comparison with the pay of the employees of Messrs Kempthorne and Prosser. He did not >cc h- w that film had the advantage of his as u^v ds ;cmpetition due to smaller wage sheets. Mr Scott said it had been conclusively proved that there was competition between the Otago and Canterbviry firms, and consequently it would be unfair to Otago employeis to bear the additional bvuden of having to pay higher wages. He submitted that the court would not be justified in going beyond the proposals made by the- employers. \ Mr Boieham said his side had proved that workers could not make ends meet. Mr Robertson's evidence proved that intelligence was required to cany on acid work. The idea of competition with Canterbury did not seem tenable. There had been no evidence before the court that Canterbury's so-called award had ever been made. Men could never get a fair thing by industrial agreements. Was it likely that Messrs Kempthorne and Prosser would permit people they were actually " running " to come along and enter into competition with them 9 If a, company made money out of the sweat, mingled with the blood, of its workers, the soon that company went " =mash " the better. His Honor sa.d the court would consider . the mattei.