LAMBERG DEFENDED.

NZ Truth, Issue 147, 11 April 1908, Page 6

LAMBERG DEFENDED.

TO THE EDITOK,

Sir,— On reading your last week's issue, I was surprised to read your account of what you are pleased to "call ".Sweating at the Sandhills." I refer to the case of Carpenter v. Lamberg. Now, m the first place, it is a recognised fact that Lamberg's men, or, as they ' are commonly known, the sand-cart men, have as easy a billet as it is possible for an unskilled laborer to obtain. They start work at something after 7 .a.m., and on an average cart four loads of sand to town a day, usually finishing about 5 p.m. Is there any slavery about that ? Your esteemed paper then states how the "poor devil" Carpenter was promoted to stableman and, vide your report, had to work 114 hours per week. Rot, sir, absolute rot; How on earth you could publish such an idiotic yarn on the flimsy evidence of a creature of the Carpenter class, I don't know. One man that I know left the same billet because he hadn't enough work to occupy his time during the day, m fact on many an occasion he put m a day's carting, and of course received extra pay for it. You then tell a pitiful yarn of how "poor devil" Carpenter was discharged, simply for lying m bed for three consecutive mornings and letting his employer do his work. You wouldn't discharge an employee for such a trivial offence, would you ? No, it's only a rumor. If you want to know energetic "poor devil." Carpenter's character just make enquiries at some of the places he has worked at and that will probably convince you that it would have been better for you and 'all concerned if you had heard both sides of the story before publishing such an idiotic yarn as you have done.— l am, etc., , , FAIRPLAY. (That little story about the man who chucked up the job because there wasn't enough work to fill m his time is the best this paper has heard to date.— Ed.)