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

BOROUGH COUNCIL v. LABOUR.

[To the Editor.! “The Mayor, B»r.»ugu Councillors, and Burgesses of Te Aroha vJ. Grant. Judgement for Plaintiff for , : amount claimed,” Sir.— To outside appearance this looks like a case of a man trying to defraud, but on looking into the matter what do we find ; A poor workman, blind and delicate trudging along wet and cold to work every morning trying to earn by the sweat of his brow, suffii* cienttn keep body and soul together to save himself from becoming a burden on the state, honestly believing that he had the consent of the Council to break certain metal, but it. seems through a misunderstanding with one : of the Councillors a mistake was made < and after this poor man had, by hard v and honest toil broken 49 yards of stone, the owner of the land on which the work was done, turned up and demanded one shilling per yard royalty on the full amount of metal broken. Now, what do the Council , do ? They drag this honesc labourer to court and compel him to return the money he honestly worked for and paid away for food and clothing, not being able to afford to employ counsel he conducted his own case with the inevitable result he lost it. Now in. this British fair play, is it humane, a poor honest workmen, almost totally blind, dragged to court, disgraejd by having what is practically a conviction for receiving money under false pretences recorded against him, I appeal to the public : are we to stand by and see a fellow workmen treated in this way, a poor blind man. I say it is a disgrace to the Mayor, and Councillors and a disgrace to the town iu which we live. As a leader for years of an organised body of workmen, I would consider it a breach of trust if I left this man suffer thr j>ugk no fault of his own, without bringing the matter before public. Let us remember that the labourer is the backbone of the country, and as a member of one of the finest labour bodies of New Zealand (IN refer to the Karangahake Miners Union) I am sorry there is not a branch in Te Aroha or <they would make these lords of creation bite the dust. I wil) .always holdout my hand nnd help a poor fellow labourer when knocked ond picked in this way.— l am etc., ' Thos. J. Stanley. Te Aroha, July 28th 1905*

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TAN19050729.2.11.1

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Te Aroha News, Volume XXII, Issue 42754, 29 July 1905, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
417

BOROUGH COUNCIL v. LABOUR. Te Aroha News, Volume XXII, Issue 42754, 29 July 1905, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL v. LABOUR. Te Aroha News, Volume XXII, Issue 42754, 29 July 1905, Page 2

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