19

1.—13

16. The Bill, you think, will work well with such a restriction or condition as you suggest ? —Yes ;it will regulate the employment of boys. We have fought the employers on this subject year after year with our own money, and cannot do anything. The only hope we have is through legislation.

Friday, 21st September, 1894. Charles McKeegan examined. 1. The Chairman : What are you?— Manager at W. Cable and Cos. la. I presume you have gone over this Bill and made yourself acquainted with its provisions ?—Yes. 2. Will you kindly state your opinions with regard to it ?—I went through it with Mr. Cable some time ago, and we pretty well agreed that the eftect of this Bill would be to do away with the apprentices altogether, or else we would have to be paid such a premium to cover ourselves that only the sons of wealthy people would be able to get into the trade. As far as the schedule of wages is concerned, 14 per cent, for the first year, 20 per cent, for the second year, and so on, of the average wages of journeymen, it would increase the pay of the apprentices, so much so that we could not keep them going and pay our way. In some cases it makes a difference of 100 per cent, on what they are being paid at present, especially during the third, fourth, and fifth years. Our apprentices for the first three years are practically non-paying. It takes what they earn for a year to find them in tools and replace the work they destroy. It is only in the last couple of years that we get any profit from them. 3. Hon. W. P. Beeves.] Will you give us a description, briefly, of the work the apprentices are put to in their first year ? —They generally potter about the machinery, getting acquainted with it, screwing bolts, and chipping castings, &c. ; then they may be put on to assist along with turners or fitters, or other tradesmen in the various branches. 4. How, then, during that time, does he destroy property?—lt is a hard thing to say, but it is a fact. • The average loss and damage is about £1 per day in the shop for the tools destroyed. He will break a tap, or something of that sort, perhaps, worth 15s. It is pretty expensive running in our trade. 5. You think that the average value of the tools destroyed in your establishment would be something like £25 per month ?—I suppose it would be something like from £200 to £300 a year. 6. You call it not more than £250, to be exact ?—Something like that. That is about what we allow. 7. How much of that would be caused by men, and how much by juniors?—l could not say that for a certainty, but the majority of the damage is done by the juniors. 8. Some of it is done by the men? —Oh, certainly. 9. How many boys have you in your establishment ?—I think there are in the whole of the departments about eighteen or twenty, at the different branches of the trade. 10. How many are there in their last two years now ? —About eight or nine of them. 11. There would be about ten in their first three years ?—About that. 12. A good deal of the work during the first year is not done with tools at all, I think; they are really messengers?—No ; they have the run of the machines. They might be put to the lathe. 13. Simple work ?—As simple as possible until they get into it. 14. Do you indenture them ?—We have, I think, four boys indentured at present. On looking back over our books I found that, during the last sixteen years, we have put through about a hundred apprentices. About fifteen were indentured. 15. You mean you had them there for the full term ?—Yes; for the full five years. 16. What would have been the disadvantage of your having these eighty-five boys indentured ? —It would be no disadvantage at all. They preferred themselves to come without being indentured. We never force any not to be indentured. 17. Then your real objection is on account of the schedule of wages?— That is one portion of it. Then there is this taking the money off their wages—this 2d. out of every Is. after the third year, and Id. out of every Is. in the second and third years. (Subsection (b), clause 12.) 18. You say that is an objection—in what way?—We do not, in the first place, see any utility in it, for it would be used simpty for a jollification after the apprentice's time was served. There is no need for it. It takes some of them all their time to live without taking Id. off them, trifling as itlooks. 19. That is your objection; you think the apprentice could not live if that Id. out of every Is. in the second and third years, and 2d. out of the Is. for the fourth and fifth years, were taken off their wages ? —I think nothing of the kind. 20. I understand that is what you said ?—I said there are some that it takes all their time to live; and that, in the majority of cases, from what I know of others it would simply mean a spree when their time was up. And, also, it would entail on our pay-sheet a good deal of unnecessary clerical work on our part. We have possibly a hundred hands to pay, with all broken money through it, and the deduction of this Id. or 2d. will come in very awkwardly. It will entail extra clerical labour on us. 21. It simply has to be paid monthly. It means one-twelfth in the case of the second and third years of the boys, and one-sixth in the fourth and fifth years of the boys, deducted per month ? —They will have to be paid every week. 22. You can take it off the last week in the month. However, that is a mere detail ?—Then there is section 20. We have had boys who could not possibly learn anything, no matter what they were put to—boys who knew no more after their time was served than when they commenced.