Untitled

Colonist, Volume LXI, Issue 15203, 16 October 1919, Page 2

It is not generally known (says an exchange) that the . Union Compans<*s vessel Wahine, which some. ( years ago was in the Welling fcah-Lyi>|elton ferry run, has during the war been employed by the Admiralty as a mine-layer. In this special work the steamer did good service. Her great advantage to( the naval authorities was the fact that she could stow away a very large number of mines, but her speed was rather a drawback, as a mine-layer is required to do about 25 knots. South Africa has more than 32,000,000 sheep, producing annually more than 170,000,000 pounds of wool. The following is an excerpt from a letter received from Mr M. J. Reardon, who was en Iroute to San Francisco: "Sharing the stern of the Tofua with a flock of stud Corriedale sheep are threp' families Three couples, all apparently in. the early thirties, with nine, healthy, happy chubby-faced children, forced to /cave New Zealand by tiie riving conditions. There must be something wrong with the management of this little new country of ours when parents are forced to pull up then- tent pegs and seek American soil for themselves and their children. Questioned as to the wisdom of the stop, they 'couldn't see how it could be worse ' Wages had gone up, •but nothing like the cost of living. Lhe house problem in Wellington was the last straw. And so New Zealand .(.sos six useful citizens and nine healthy, happy children, ages raneiap from eighteen months to.nine years! And tho Minister for Lands asks you to believe that he is solving something by helping the returned soldiers to "buy homes!" ■ J A case of unusual interest'to employers of labour and their apprentices was before the Magistrate at Auckfe nd> Mi;-, J- W- l^yutori, last week, lhe Auckland Tailoresses' Union asked for a penalty of .£SO against Messrs. ociiniedeman Brothers for failino- to instruct a female apprentice. The&girl had, it was submitted, been for four years a ladies' coat-hand and, after completion of her term, was dismissed, because slio would not sign an application to be classed as an under-rate worker. The union claimed the want of efficiency was tho fault of defendants, who did not give the apprentice the teaching due to her. His Worship said the evidence showed that for two and a-half years the girl received hardly any Instruction, being mostly engaged sweeping out rooms and "running messages. .. During the remainder of her term she was almost continually on "alteration" work, which gave excellent practice in sewing and joining, but very little in constructional work. He would not accept the defence that the girl was unwilling to learn, inattentive, and lazy, and held that defendants had failed in their duty to instruct the apprentice, adding that it was fair to state the partners did not interfere, but left it to their hands. 'They were, however, responsible to see that apprentices got what was due to them. The idea of applying for an under-rate permit for tlio girl had not come from the partners, and the fact should bo known that th&y did not suggest it either. His Worship held tliat the girl had been seriously wronged through the absence of proper teaching during her apprenticeship, and therefore the penalty must be substantial, not only as a " deterrent in rases, but to help to make good hor present defects as a. tradeswoman. Judgment was for £50 and costs, security for appeal being fixed at £20. Mr. Poynton suggested that two-thirds be given to the girl,' and onrvthird be held in trust to be expended in getting" her the instruction necessary' .to make her a competent ladies' 'coat-hand. Coste £5 2s were allowed.