CHRISTCHURCH ITEMS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 781, 2 April 1910, Page 6

CHRISTCHURCH ITEMS.

MARRIED COUPLES AND FARM WORK. ■ (By HMocraph.—Special OorresDonacnt.r Christchurehi April 1. The Christchurch Tramway Board recently asked the police to-take steps to secure the observance of the , -by-law regarding passengers '■ joining or leaving tramcar,s in motion; -, The police' have kept,a watchful eye upon the cars in the city; and as a-result a'number of informations have been laid against people who, it is stated, have been detected; jumping on or off moving cars. A mail against whom a prohibition order was Issued at Lytfelton, yesterday morning adopted ■a. militant attitude .towards the ''Law," and. registered an' emphatic but futile protest. ; As soon as the case was (WM, served with a:notico regarding the order, and was told that it took oiiect from that m'o- ; "Then I'm , goi'ig_ to .hive a drink;" he-remarked, or words to that effect,, and betook himself to a bar. He .was addressing himself to a:glass when a constable entered to see what he'was about. The : unfortunate protestant will probably 1 . hear.. more: about the matter. A tribute' to the progress of football iu Squth Canterbury. was paid the president of- the Canterbury Rugby Union (Mr. George H. Mason) last evening. He said 1 that in the past the Canterbury TJhion had looked upon the match Canterbury v. South Canterbury as a ■'■ stepping-stone to other representative ,'. fixtures. . Last year, however, . South Canterbury had. shown that they were doughty opponents, and instead of this being looked upon as , a trial match, in .the future it should be taken- just as seriously as other southern games. The fixtures should bo rearranged, so that the team which played Otago and Southland would play South Canterbury... He heaitily congratulated South Canterbury on their success, and wished' their union continued success in the, future. ' " .

- Mr. ,W. H. Hagger, officer in: charge of the local branch of- the Department of Labour, was asked yesterday by, a reporter whether in Ms experience the possession of. "encumbrances" by married couples was a bar to.their obtaining employment in the country. He replied that it did prevent many married couples from getting employment for-various reasons, although .he did not regard the mat-terras one of any seriousness, and had not Heard any complaints regarding it. In many cases married couplos wera required for back stations, where thoy might have to reside in a portion of the house' occupied by tho manager, and in that case a number of children about the bouse would require some keeping in, hand. The wife had also to do-a good deal of cooking, waehing, and v> on, and, with a number of children, could not D<i expected to attend to her duties properly. That was the case from tho employers' side. Bat, on the other hand, many couples with children wero averse to taking work on the .back stations for the children could get no schooling, and usually there waa no doctor within a long radius. .Frequently an allowance was made for the children if they were old enough to be useful about the station, but, as a' rule,' maTried couples with children did not apply because they knew they were incapab'-e of fulfilling their duties.properly.