WAR CLOTHING

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2862, 29 August 1916, Page 6

WAR CLOTHING

LOCAL CONTRACTS

WERE THEY BROKEN?

CASES IN COURT

SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS

In the Magistrate's C'curt yesterday hearing was commenced of eight cases against Abraham Levy, who is charged 1 with breaches of contract regarding the supply of military uniforms. Chiefly, it seems, Levy is accused of having sown the seams of garments with cotton instead of with linon thread, mid the assertion ia that cotton will not stand wear and tea.r as linen thread will, and perishes when exposed to moisture. Mr. L. G. Eeid, S.M., is hearing tho cases. Mr. Macassey, of the Crown Law Office, is prosecuting, and Levy is being defended' by Messrs. A. Gray, K.C., and M. Myers. The case for the Crown has been outlined. The hearing of evidence has been commenced, and the cases now stand adjourned till to-morrow. The eight charges against Levy read: "That at Wellington he did l wilfully break a contract made by him with tho Crown on January 10, 1916, for the purpose of the present war, to wit, a contract for the supply of military uniforms by delivering to tho Crown in pursuance of that contract goods which were not in accordance with the terms thereof, contrary to regulation. 12 of the regulations dated November 15, 1915, made pursuant- to tho War R-egulations Act, 1914."

The dates mentioned in the charges are June 23, 1916, June 27, June 29, July 4, 6, 7, 8 and 11. Crown Outlines its Case. In his outline of the Crown's case Mr. Macassoy said: "Proceedings are taken under Regulation 12 of the regulations made under the War Regulations Act 1914', which provides that no person shall wilfully break any contract ' made by the Crown in respect of or for the purposo of the present war. Section 4 imposes a penalty of £100, oi imprisonment for twelvo months. His Worship: That is, for any breach ? .Mr. Macassey: Yes. , Mr. Macassy, continuing"The facts are that in December of last year a contract was mado by tho Crown with Abraham Levy lor tho mnnufaoture'of certain military garments for the purposes of tho war. Leva's contract was for tho supply of titrjics, pantaloons, and greatcoats as follows: — "February: 3500. tunics. 1700 trousers. ]M 0 pants. 5000 greatcoats. . ~. "Those • figures apply-also to March, April, Mry, June, and Jupy. "And so on till December.- The -specifications, Clause 4, provided that all seams are to be sown with linen thread equal in quality ,to Knox's No. 60. That is the point in this case —that such thread -was to bo used for tho r.eanib.

"Before the contract wiis entered into with Levy, there was a meeting of manufacturers, at which Levy was present, and tliey were told that all seams must be sewn with linen thread, and tho 'reason was that it : is absolutely necessary for strong and lasting work, which is required in the easo of seams. It is a well-known fact that, cotton will not stand wear, and will perish with exposure to moisture. Even iii ordinary tailoring, no reputable tailor would use cotton for tho seanis of garments. In April it Was ascertained by the Defence authors ties that cotton was hoing used' in tho seams of garments made by Levy, and on April 28, 1916, a letter was sent to him pointing out that linen thread was not being used." Mr. Gray: We say he never got that letter. Mv. Macassey- I shall he able to prove that up to the hilt. In answer to that letter the defendant Levy called on Messrs. Lewis and Frost, of "the Defence Stores; and made reference to' the communication. He produced tha letter and asserted that ho was using linen thread. So we shall be able to show that that statement about not receiving the letter is absolutely false. Levy invited them to go to the factory at any time, and see for themselves. A day .or two later Lewis called at Levy's factory, and in the bulk room was shown a reel of linen thread which Was said to be tho class of thread used for tho seams of these garments.

v A Letter from Levy. So Lewis was. absolutely deceived into the belief that linen thread waa being used. Later, Messrs. ICirkcaldia and-Morrison called at Levy's factory, and found that linen thread was not being used, but that Buffalo khaki cotton was. They took some of the cotton away. Levy was not present on tho occasion of their,visit. In roferenco to the position of Messrs. Kirk caldie and Morrison, lie would like to say this: When the contracts were being let/for tho supply of military gar ments, great difficulty was experienced in arranging contracts. The Minister of Munitions asked them to lend then assistance in. the matter of arranging contracts, and this they have done, giVing up a great amount of time and doing a tremendous amount of work without remuneration. There could be no suggestion that they had any personal animus. against Levy. Shortly after their visit Levy wrote the following letter, dated' July 17, to the Department:—

"I jvery much regret to inform you I have not kept strictly to the letter of the contract, having used cotton thread in some instances as more suitable and as -working better on the machine. . Linen thread was not always to be depended upon until lately. As regards durability and the wear, there is no disadvantage in using any thread, as the scams of the tunic are mostly raised, ajid will stand all tho wear and strain, lasting as long a 6 tho material. The same applies to the seams of the overcoats. This also ■will last as long as the matorial. It is only lately that this cotton •thread has teen on tho market. Mr. Morrison ripped a pair of ldtoki trousers to show the inferiority of the sewing. Now, I have a pair of railway trousers stitched withi the cotton thread, and you will see that this thread is really stronger than Knox's linen thread. It is cotton thread, and was used as at tho timo black linen thread was not to be procured. Now, if you will allow luo to test every pair of trousors at present in the Defence Stores, not only those made by me, in tho sanio way as Mr. Morrison tested mine, I will not fail to convince them that they will show tho samo result. I am prepared to make good nil damage done by me in this way. I am sending you herewith a pair of railway trousers stitched with linen thread, and if you test them you will find them go the samo way. But in ordinary wear and

tear the;- also hold and give every satisfaction, as tho exnorieneo of twenty years has taught us. Of courso I intend to use nothing but Knox's thread until the end of my contract, and should I bo unsuccessful in procuring fame will" call on ycm." 11,000 Carments Mot Accopted. "That letter is very important. In it there is no suggestion, no statement, that; Levy was ignorant of tho fact that cotton thread was being used. It is a clear admission tliot lie did know that cotton thread was being used. And the statement that a supply of linen thread! was not always to be depended upon was untrue, because Frank and Bryce, Ltd, held ample stocks of Knox's linen thread. Those supplies were available for the past twelve months. The. cotton used was the cheapest and the poorest. "Under this contract thoro havo been supplied: Tunics 19,954 Trousers 11,499 Pants 9,254 Greatcoats 12,596 "That makes a total of 53,303 garments to the end of June.

"The following garments have been held up as not being, in accordance with contract:— Tunics 3,849 Trousers 2,979 Pants 2,624 Greatcoats 1,680 11,132 "That means that out of 53,303 garments 42,171 have been accepted. "As to Levy's motive in using this cotton (thread the position is that Knox'jJ linen thread runs a-t 12s. lOd. per spool of 3000 yards, while cotton thread costs 7s. ljd. for the same quantity. Experts will show that a saving could be effected by this substitution of cotton for linen thread of £28 ss. lid. per month, or a total of £141 Is. 6d. for the-fivo months ended June. That is tlie actual saving in the cost of the material, and l does not take into account tho question of the heavier wear and tear by tho linen thread. It will be shown that tho total purchases of linen thread by Levy during these months was about £81 wbrth, which represents 1,2-12,000 yards of linen thread, per month. His total purchases of thread would only servo for a. period of about six weeks. That shows the extent to which he has used cotton.

The Legal A sped. "As to the legal aspcct of the cases, where tlie word 'wilrul' is used the onus is on the Crown, to prove mens rou;, and whether that is held to bo proved or not proved is a matter of drawing ~iufcrenco from facts established. It was Levy's Uuty to see that the terms of tho contract were strictly observed. It is imiwssible to prove right up to the hilt precisely what his ltnowlodge was, but tho facts will be proved so that tho only possible inlerence to be drawn is that Levy was aware of what was going oil. It is inconceivable that a big contractor liko Levy, exercising supervision over his works, could have failed to see that the contract was not being observed. Levy's attention was directed to the use of cotton, and it lie wilfully or carelessly abstained from making all necessary efforts to see that linen thread was used, and that the terms- of the contract were adhered to, ho was guilty of the olfencb charged' against him. "I desire to emphasise tho following facts,- which 1 claim establish guilty knorledftc 9n tho part of Levy: 1. That Levy was informed at a meeting of manufacturers in December that linen thread must be >2. The contract specified linen thread expressly. . 3. The letter of April'2B, 1916, was written by Levy, and his at- , tention drawn to the_ fact that' linen tliTead was not being used. <1. Levy asserted, to Lewis that ho was using linen thread, a statement which was absolutely untrue, and Lewis was; thereby mislead. 5. That Messrs. Kirkcaldie and Morrison found cotton reels in actual use. y 6. The letter of Levy of July 17,1916, admitted the stuff he was using was cotton, as linen thread was not to bo depended on,' this statement was falso. 7. Most of the letters written by defendant to the Defence Department officers were written by Levy himself, which showed he took-a •, keen interest in the business. 9. That Levy had failed to deny ' that cotton Teels were in his factory. The difference in size was

very great. "If wo succeed in establishing these facts, the maxiihum penalty should be imposed. It is a heinous offencothat a man should make such a breach of contract concerning uniforms .which were to go to the front with men who are fighting for us." The First Witness. Mr. Macassey called Alfred Montague Adams, who produced letters to and from Levy, and a letter by Professor Scott, who had made tests of the linen thread and the cotton thread. Professor Scott wrote that he had tested the samples with tho following J'esults: —The approximate diameter of linen was 9-1000 and cotton 13-1000. Although tho cotton was thicker, the breaking strain on the cotton was 51b., and on the linen 6Jlb. It was-evi-dent that the linen thread was considerably the stronger. It should also be by far tho most' durable. He was of opinion that linen thread was the correct material for. sewing the uniforms with.

Mr. Gray : Have you beon in charge of the munitions department since its inception ? Witness: Yes. You are awaro that Levy has boon a- contractor for tho supply of uniforms sinco the beginning of the war, and that he contracted to mako uniforms for Territorials before the war? —"I cannot say." You are not aware, then, that ho made tlie uniforms for the Main Body?— "That was before my time." liad there been any other complaints of Levy's work?—" Just the usual complaints regarding bad cutting, misfits, etc." Was linen thread specified in previous' contracts? —"I understand not. That is wKy such great care was taken to let all know." Do you know how Professor Scott mado his tests? —"No; but his is the test we rely on."

Wero there other manufacturers of military clothing in New Zealand having contracts with the Government? AA'itness did not wish to answer bofore referring to tho Crown Solicitor. Subsequently he said there was one other .contractor. ! Mr. Gray: I don't think you quifco understand me. I do not ask if tliero is any other contractoi in tho same position as Mr. Levy is in to-ddy. I ask: Have any others contracts to make uniforms?' AVitness: Oh yes, plenty. Mr. Gray wished' to put in letter, l ) "relating to tho circumstances under which tho iiso of cotton took place, and the way in which Levy offered to compensate tho Government for tho uso of cotton." Mr. Macassey objected to tho admission of tlio letters. He said they wero written after tho event. Levy., when ho wrote them, knew that something had happened, and it was only natural to think that ho would shape his letters accordingly. His AA'orßhip ruled t)iat tho lc.ttors could Jiot go in.

Tim Director of ordnance Stores. Major Thomas M'Cristell, Director of Permanent Ordnauco Stores, gave evidence to the effect that iie had written to Levy drawing attention to tho tact that Levy was hot using linon thread l , and requesting him to do, so. Mr. Myers: I understand that in each of 'these contracts there vs .a sealed sample. Witness: There is. . I suppose you do not know much yourself about these garireuts?—"Nothing of trie technicalities. I am a soldier, pnro and simple. ... So far as I am concerned they are submitted to mo for cut and fit. I have to depend for my advice 011 the experts. 1 sign a sealed sample after they have passed it. Messrs. Lewis and Frost are my experts. Mr. Macassey: In these sealed samples the question of the sewing of the seams does not enter? It- is meicly a question of out?

Major M'Cristall: Yes. As to the sewing of the seams, I expect them to follow out the terms of the contract. Cither Witnesses. A Defence clerk, Arthur Thomas Charles Alossip, deposed that on April 28 he posted at To Aro Post Office the letter which M'Cristell said he had written to' Levy. George Alfred Bell, Defence clerk, produced a posting book to show that on April 28 a letter to Levy was recorded. Benjamin Lewis, chief examiner of goods at the Defence Stores, was called. Referring to the letter written by Mr. M'Cristell, witness said that Levy called on him and said: "What am I to do about this letter?" .Witness answered: "You know that best yourself. l'ou know the terms of your contract." On that occasion reference was made to the question of thread, and Levy said ho was , using Knox's thread, not first quality, but second quality, known as the Victoria brand. • Levy invited witness, to visit his factory and see tho thread, and when witness did so, Levy's eon gavo him a reel of Knox's second quality.

Mr. Gray: Do you know that defendant looks after the office? Witness: I thought ho was in general supervision of the factory. You did not think he was the foreman? _ At this 'stage the case was adjourned till to-morrow morning.