MALICIOUS INJURY TO PROPERTY AT GARRETT BROTHERS'. Auckland, May 12.

Te Aroha News, Volume I, Issue 50, 17 May 1884, Page 3

MALICIOUS INJURY TO PROPERTY AT GARRETT BROTHERS'. Auckland, May 12.

A disgraceful instance of malicious injury to property was perpetrated at Garrett Brothers' premises on Saturday night. An illuminated fixture had been erected over the verandah, and some evil-disposed person on Saturday night or early on Sunday morning mounted up to it, either by means of a ladder or with the aid of other men, and cut it to pieces. Information was given to the police yesterday, and the firm, by advertisement in another column, oiler a reward of £20 for the detection of the offender. The occurrence of this outrage ju&t now has created the suspicion that the act is one of retaliation adopted b> the men -who recently struck work at the factory. It is sincerely to be hoped that this suspicion will prove to be unfounded, and that we are not to be subjected in this colony to the evils of terrorism which have brought so : much misery in England. The Bootmakers' I Union have promptly repudiated all symi pathy with the outrage by adding a reward ! of £o to that offered by Garrett Brothers. A statement having been made in our columns on the authority of the Bootmakers' Union that the strike is in consequence of a reduction of wages in their establishment, Messrs Garrett Brothers wish not only to deny this most emphatically, but to publish the actual facts of the case. A demand having arisen for narrow-toed boots, two men in their factory were put on that work, at the rate of pay for soling which they had previously received. Pending the construction of knives of the new shape— a matter of less than a fortnight— the soles were cut out with the broad-toed shapes. This involved running a knife round the last at the toe before soling. The men madeademand for additional pay to the foreman, who demurred to it as unreasonable. Without consulting the factory proprietors, the men then called a meeting of finishers and other Association hands employed in the factory, and it was resolved to go out unless extra pay were given to the men put on this work. When the decision was communicated to Messrs Garrett Bros., they considered that if they yielded under the compulsion thus hastily applied they would be involved in perpetual labour difficulties, and they determined, therefore, to put up with the inconveniences of a strike, and refused to hold any more communications with the men on the subject. They state further that they are paying a higher rate for benchmen than most of the other factories in town, and have always endeavoured to treat their men well. They believed this demand, and the combination of finishers and others who were not in any \ray affected to enforce it, was a vexatious one, intended to harrassthem at a busy time, and they thought it better to suffer the loss of resisting it than to submit. Enough hands remained in the factory, with the assistance of the partners, to execute pressing orders and supply all local demands. The version of the strike given by the men agrees with that of the firm as to the point at dispute. Their contention, however, is that the work of cutting the toes to the shape of the narrow last was equal to l^d a pair, and that they ought to have received that sum until the new knives for sole-cutting on the altered shape were ready. The finishers, as Union men, were bound, they say, to go out with the men who were immediately affected The point of difference— amounting in reality to nothing more than a small temporary inconvenience to two or three hands —seems so trifling that we are surprised the men should have deemed the grievance, even if their view of the case were a right one, of sufficient importance to throw themselves and their families on the funds of a newly-formedsocietyatatimewhenthefailure of two boot-factory proprietors has imposed a considerable amount of unavoidable distress upon operatives engaged in this trade. The affair seems from beginning to end to be one of those instances in which hasty, illconsidered action and attempted compulsion has provoked a struggle and bitterness of feeling over a thing not worth fighting about.