"ALL LEATHER"

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 87, 11 April 1924, Page 8

"ALL LEATHER"

BOOT IMPORTERS PROSECUTED

T.HE MERITS OF.. f'COMPO."

The merits of shoes bearing the stamp-' mark "all leather," -and of other shoes the stamp-mark of which was not considered .by the Labour .Department to adequately, describe, their" composition, were discussed before Mr. B. Page; S.M., at the Magistrate'?. Court to-day, when several Wellington shoe-importing firms were .asked, to explain why they were selling shoes which bore stamp-marks contrary to the Footwear 'Regulations Act. . .' ' . The defendants were S.C. Sparrow, The Ideal Shoe Company, Hart Pennin'gton, Ltd., 11. Hannah and Co., Ltd.,.and A. E. ilann, and they were each charged with exposing for sale, and selling, boots and shoes .without having a statement of the material or materials composing the soles conspicuously and legibly stamped' on (he outer surface of the sole", as-"required by the regulations'. of the Act. ■ • . ' t . S. C. Sparrow was also charged.with exposing for sale shoes marked "solid leather, ' whereas the shoes were composed of brown paper and leather, contrary to section i of the Footwear Rregulations Act1, 1913. : Mr. 11. T. Bailey prosecuted on behalf of the Labour Department. 1 " PAY MORE TO GET LEATHER," In ; connection with the case, against Manri, Mij. Bailey stated that ■an examination of defendant's shop had .resulted in shoes being found stamped "all leather soles," but they were composed of "'compo." insoles and. stiffness composed of\pk'Ces of split leather \ pasted together. Mann had stated that he had arranged to pay a little more to get the goods " all leather,",'as he had noticed that the definition, of the sample stated that the goods were " compo." . . _Mr. Page: "Could you detect this without cutting the shoe up?" . . / Mr. Bailey: '' I did, sir." > ' Mr. P. Keesing, who appeared for defendant,' submitted that Mann had not. been able to tell from the putside that the shoes were not " all leather." .The Magistrate said that it' seemed 'that defendant had taken active 'steps to get shoes " all leather " by paying higher prices, and as it appeared'that he. had acted honestly, '. a nominal penalty would be imposed. Mann was fined £1. A VICTIMISED FIRM. ,;•' • In the case of Hannah and Co., Mr. Bailey said that the shoes upon which the charge was based had- brown paper piece lifts, and should have been, stamped accordingly. s ' ■ ■ It was mentioned by. Mr. G. G. Watson that Hannah and Co. had been vmtimised by the firm in England which supplied the goods. Counsel quoted from the order-form,- across the' top of which 'he said was written' "all goods» must be stamped. to comply with New, Zealand footwear regulations." Mr. Watson said dealers had been supplied with .a copy of the. Act.and-the regulations, which they had to comply with. The petty saving, made by the. manufacturers :u England did not'amount to more than one penny a shoe. Hannah 'and Co. had acted in a bona fide manner. Mr. Page said . that , the defendant seemed to have taken active steps to obtain goods properly stamped as re-\ quired by the law. Out^of ,a' large sto^konly two samples contrary to the regulations . had : been - found. Defendant would be fined £2. ... : CARDBOARD IN THE SHOE. ■ It was alleged by Mr. Bailey in re-, gard to Hart Pennih'gton, Ltd., iridentors, that the line of footwear was stamped "compo," stiffness and insoles; whereas' the material used was cardboard; I and that, further,' the firm had strap shoes: with wood:.heels not stamped. Defendants had stated that instructions had been given to the Home, buyers that application should'be made to the HighN Commissioner's office for regulations regarding the importation. of' .footwear. / Mr. .Bailey stated that he had pointed out to defendants that although the shoes were stamped "compo," cardboard was used. .were represented by Mr. T. G. Smith, .who said that there was no intention,to mislead on the part of &*&>3o* ' inC"l92° hSd tUrned ".'..'. "NOT ADEQUATE." '■'■;, ■ The, Magistrate said that the' steps defendants, had taken, to see that' the' goods complied with the regulations were ,not adequate. "Vendors of footwear must always see that, their purchases comply with^the law," added tlfe Bench a tine of ±/5. was imposed. ' ; .-..'• (Proceeding.). ' : . ■.