ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 6, 2 October 1937, Page 10

ARBITRATION COURT

“Breeze” At Auckland Hearing

By Telegraph—Press Association.

Auckland, October 1.

A slight “breeze” occurred in the Court of Arbitration to-day. The court was hearing claims by employees of country local bodies for a 40-hour week and increased wages, which, it was asked, should be made retrospective in view of the prolonging of the dispute. Mr. W. E. Anderson, who appeared for the Auckland Employers’ Association, said they could not accept responsibility for the delay. It was not usual to mention conciliation proceedings, but the other side had done so and he must claim the right of reply. He then said that Mr. T. Stanley, for the union, had stated in the Conciliation Council that an unsatisfactory award would suit him, as it would help to smash the court, and that the sooner they had Russian conditions the better. “I need say no more about the conciliation proceedings than that,” Mr. Anderson said.

Mr. Stanley said Mr. Anderson’s attempted bombshell was unfair and it was not correct to select part of any remarks to suit him without giving the context. “I do not deny my political leanings,” he said, “but the-fact is that Mr. Anderson had referred to conditions in Australia. I pointed out that we were dealing with New Zealand, and said that if he wished to bring iu other countries I could do so, too.”

Mr. Justice O’Regan: It doesn't really matter, but it would be far better if references were not made to other cases.

Every great invention is first of all a thought—an idea. Why should not yours lead to something big and revolutionary—something that may mean a fortune to you if protected in time? Delays are dangerous. Get experienced and sincere advice from Henry Hughes, Ltd. (Directors: W. E. Hughes and J T. Hunter, Regd. Patent Attorneys), 214-2.17 D.I.C. Bulldiug, Wellington.— Advt.