THE APPRENTICE QUESTION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXII, Issue 189, 1 August 1900, Page 3

THE APPRENTICE QUESTION.

INTERESTING REMARKS BY MR. JUSTICE MARTIN. [PBE PBHSS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, July 31. Commenting upon the apprentice question at the Arbitration Court, Mr. Justice Martin said it was fast becoming a problem with the nation as to what should be dona to make our boys competent tradesmen. Owing to the introduction of machinery and specialising of various branches of trade, the old timo indenture system had practically become of little use. Employers no longer believed in legal indenture, and did not support it; yet nothing had been done to take its place. Consequently, trades were injured by the flooding of the labour market with incompetent workers. His mind had ' been considerably exercised over the | matter since he had taken up the work i of the Arbitration Court. He thought • a way out cf the difficulty would be _ the establishment of trade schools, run j in conjunction with the present State [ schools, through which boys should I be compelled to pass as through their • ordinary school course. By this meant lads who wanted to follow the occupa- \ tion of a carpenter, for ingtanoe, would }% s\% to a fomm jup*

ledge of the trade before beeoming eni gaged in it practically. During the hearing of the carpenters' caee by the Arbitration Court, one employer said I his chief objection to preference of employment being giving to Unionists was that under such clause he would have to discharge non-Unionists whom he had been employing for years and take Unionists on in their places. Judge Martin said he knew of no case in whieh the Court had upheld such an interpretation of the preference olause. The Court held that the employer must be the judge of the men he employed. The Court had never yet made an award under which masters were compelled to discharge their hands to make way for Unionists. The position was that when employers were engaging hands, and two presented themselves for engagement, one being a member of the Union and the other not, then a Unionist must be engaged beforeanon-Unionist. Neither did the Court give the preference clause to close corporations. The Court had found that as employers came to understand the preference clause they found there was nothing to object to in it,