ARBITRATION COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIX, Issue 11593, 31 May 1898, Page 3

ARBITRATION COURT.

The Arbitration’Court, consisting of his Honor Mr Justice Edwards-and Messrs H. Thomson and R. Slater, continued its sitting in the engineers’dispute-at 10.30 yesterday morning. Mr Justice Edwards said that a good deal of the latter part of the evidence-had tended to show that men employed by the agricultural implement makers possessed, a less degree of skill than men who were employed in ordinary engineering work, and if that was so it might be that these men would have to accept a differential wage. . . Mr Booth said the same difficulty had occurred ■ to bis mind, and seemed to show the impossibility of fixing ; one regular minimum wage for various degrees of skill. T. Dahks, examined by ' Mr Booth, stated that he worked up a good deal of raw material in the shape of metal. Pig iron and steel lauded in Christchurch cost 40 per cent more than the homo price. Coal was 10s a ton, and coke 8s 6da ton dearer in Christchurch than in Dunedin or Wellington. The imported American brass goods were sold here at far less than English prices, and threatened to block out local manufacture altogether. The American brass work was not so good as the English, but it enjoyed the approbation of buyers. The ordinary engineering’ work done to meet colonial demands was not of such a high class as that required at Home for the building of engines, &c. To Mr Scott: About 80 _per cent of the work done in an ordinary engineers’ shop was equal in point of quality to that done in the agricultural shops. The other 20 per cent was of a higher quality. Repair work generally was cut so low in price as to leave but little margin. In the opinion of witness it was impossible for the master engineers to pay higher wages than at present. If they did so they would have to.raise their prices, with the result that the bulk of their work would either not be done at all, orwould be done in other centres. There weretwentysix individuals (list handed in) who-carried ont engineering work in Canterbury at their own prices, kept the work in their own families, and did not come, as far as witness knew, within the scope of the Conciliation Board. To Mr Fraser: Had employed a man named Wickham to erect a windmill and lay pipes at Belfast. Witness paid him 10s a day, as he was a-competent man. In reply to Mr Justice Edwards the witiiess said that in Wellington lump Newcastle coal cost £1 per ton and in | Christchurch £llss per ton. Mr Scott pointed out that, deducting charges, freight, &0., coaLcost 4s 4d.more per ton in Christchurch than in Wellington. To Mr Fraser: Had lately tendered for a steam-reducing.- valve at the hospital, and had obtained the-contract. He bad to use patterns !;or the job, but had failed iu an attempt to borrow patterns from Mr Scott. He called the boys in his shop assistants, and not apprentices. The day was gone by for apprentices, and his assistants were taught their trades-as-long as they behaved well. He employed in-all six men, who were-all tradesmen,and seven boys. Nichola&Oates.cyclemarßrfacturGr, called, by Mr Booth, produced notes taken from the labour returns of his.shop for the year 1897-8. On Jan. 1 he made the returnsproduced for the Labour Department, and believed then to be correct. He paid various rates of wages according to the class of work. Cross-examined by Mr Fraser, witness said there were six boys in his employ who were getting 5s a week apiece. These would learn their trade if they behaved themselves, hut were not apprenticed. Witness had one apprentice twenty-eight years of age, who started at £1 a week, and was now receiving 30s. He had kept no copy of his Government returns,, and was not aware that the Act required him to have a copy of these posted up in the shop. To Mr Booth: When witness wanted boys he never required a press gang to bring them in; he rather wanted a policemanto keep away the mothers and sisters of the boys who wished for occupation. Any man could be taught in ten days to do the boring for a plough axle, but it would take as many years to learn the same work for the bottom bracket of a bicycle. Richard Kent, bicycle manufacturer, produced a list of wages paid at his shop. The returns he had sent in to the Labour Department were correct. Thomas Boyd, cycle manufacturer, deposed that his returns as sent in to the Department of Labour were correct. William Moor, coacbbuilder, produced a copy of bis wage book, from which the returns of 1897-8 had been made to the Labour Department. These were correct. To Mr Fraser: Witness could not say if the Government returns were truthful or -otherwise. J. L. Scott, handedin aJist-o£ all work-

men employed' by his firm who were? affected by the dispute. The yearly sum paid to these men was .£I3BO. Under the ■ demand the amount would be .£2301, or an increase of 66'7. per cent. i G. T. Booth, agricultural implement-maker, called by Mr Scott, deposed that 46| hours per week were worked, in the summer, and 46 hours iii the winter at his establishment. The men were paid at per hour throughout, and the .apprentices at per week. The men; had never, expressed dissatisfaction at this arrangement, but there was a difficulty in' getting men to work on Saturday afternoons. The Union demands, irrespective of overtime charges, amounted to-60 per cent inerease-'on the present wages. The-demands applied to. the blacksmiths’ shops would moan an increase of £993 4s lOd per annum-; or, taking the whole shop, to-£3120. His business- did not warrant an increase in wages, and it would be absolutely impossible to pay any appreciable advance ansi carry on under'present lines. If the Union demands were granted, his firm, would have to import instead of manufacture.' On an average, with the mamifacturing business in New Zealand, ten men. failed where one succeeded. It took more capabiiity to make money out of manufacturing than in any other way, as-so many uncertain-' elements were introduced into it. He could pot compete favourably at present with imported articles, and during the pastfew years there .had been an amazing revulsion in favour of imported gpods. He con--sidered too many in Christchurch had joined, in the craze for local industries, to their cost. He thought that -with one apprentice to oneman, a boy would get a better teaming than, he would if working with four men, as in the latter case he would getveryiitHe chance. of doing good work. It would never pay an employer to keep his apprentices back, as his only profit lay in getting good work out of them. The witness preferred apprentices trained in his own establishment to any imported men he had employed. Nearly all his present adult hands had been trained in the firm’s shop. One workman, so far as he knew, in his employ, was a Unionist. He knew of no reason why a small minority of Unionists should have preference of employment. When he engaged a man he never asked him whether he belonged to a-Cnim or not. If any preference was shown in thedirection of employment, the majority-should have that preference. Were the ruling rate of wages appreciably increased, he would have to close his shop. The proposal made by the Board of Conciliation was, in Ms opinion, absolutely useless, and would have the effect of making the earning of a mini-mum-wage impossible in some classes of'work. If an award was made raising the present wages, it would also mean that labourers would, to a large extend he employed in the place-of skilled mechanics. To Mr Beaven: Nine out of ten country' blacksmiths filled in their spare time in. making tine -harrows, drays and otherimplements, and the price at which they did their work practically settled the prices of these-arfeicles-. in the country districts. His firm was not in the hahit of paying extra for overtime, the' reason beingihat the implement did not pay sufficiently to warrant it. Any increase in cost of manufacture would kill the export trade, which was already moribund. At 5-10 p.m. the Court adjourned until 10.30’this -morning.