Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SLAUGHTERMEN'S DISPUTE.

(Per Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, last night. Over 100 slaughtermen were summoned to appear before the Arbitration Court to-day m 'Connection witli Hie strike at Islington and Belfast. Judge Sim presiiletl, and was supported by Mr S. Brown and Mr 11. Wlatter. Intense interest was evidently taken m tlie cases, and tlie Court was crowded with rough, hardy slaughtermen and members of the general public. Mr T. W. Stringer pro- j secuted, and Mr J. J. Dougall defended. Mr Stringer outlined the coui'sc of events leading up to the trouble. He submitted that there had undoubtedly been a strike, and called evidence. Mr Dougull, m reply, said that there were a great number of men summoned, •and no' factious defence was being put forward. That fact, lie submitted, ought to weigh Aritli the Court. As regarded the general principle of the whole matter, lie submitted that under the circumstances m which the men worked they ought not to be convicted of striking. They were liable to be dismissed at a moment's notice, and they were never expected to give notice. As regards tlie legal aspect, he submitted that the agreement of Febrnriry, 1904, under which the parties were working," was unenforceable by reason of the fact that proper formalities for its execution were not complied with. He submitted that where an award or agreement had been entered into prior to the passing of an Act, the persons subject to that agreement" could not be brought within the penal" prosecutions of section .15. 0f the Act. If his Honor decided that an offence had been committed, and that tlie men should be fined, he submitted that section 15 came within section 101 of the original A,ct, by which the total amount of fines that could be inflicted under any award or agreement was limited to £500. If these men were fined the Court must take tliis limitation into consideration, remembering that there were cases still to come before the Comt m. connection with the matter now proceeding. He also emphasised the quiet and orderly behaviour of the men, who had committed no action which could bring them wjthin the penal clauses of the jaw, apart from this section 15 of the Arbitration Act. His Honor intimated that judgment of ■tho Court would be delivered at 10 a.m the next day. TIMAHU, last night. Smithfield and Pareora have a few men killing potters. . INVERCARGILL, last night. There are no . new strike developments m Southland. '

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19070306.2.33

Bibliographic details

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10913, 6 March 1907, Page 4

Word Count
413

SLAUGHTERMEN'S DISPUTE. Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10913, 6 March 1907, Page 4

SLAUGHTERMEN'S DISPUTE. Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10913, 6 March 1907, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert