H.—6

the employer might send a nominee quite outside the trade. As regarded new class of work and the fixing of the price therefor by the Local Board, the Union thought that the new class should be forwarded to the Local Board for its decision. But this rested considerably on the decision of that Board as to whether the machinery department should form a special class. As to the Local Board, the Union was of opinion that it should not have power to arrange wages, as provided in the clause. The Union wished to see another department, which should be called the skilled department. With regard to the employment of apprentices, the Board would find that the difference was a small one, the manufacturers asking that the apprentices should have three months' trial. The Union thought that the trial should only be two months. As to decreasing the proportion of journeymen to apprentices, it would make the trade far worse than it was now, which was not by any means desirable. The proportion on the present statement was 1 to 3 in the clicking department, with Ito 5 where special work was required. The Union asked that 1 to 3 should remain, but that the extra boys should be done away with. The manufacturers wanted to retain the extra boys, which meant an increase of two boys throughout the clicking department. These boys, who learnt the trade in a way, were not, he wished to point out, apprentices. The objection of the Union to the extra boys was that men would be crowded out. In the other departments the Union asked that the proportion of men employed should be made larger. With regard to the determining of the number of boys to journeymen, the Union wished that men should be on the books for six months, working two-thirds full time, before they could be taken into consideration in counting the proportion. On clause 7, forbidding foremen instructors from becoming members of unions: Foremen —that is, persons in charge of a department—were not allowed by the employes to be members of a union. So far, however, as he knew, foremen instructors for the boys were not looked upon m any way as direct representatives of the employers. The Union were of opinion that they were only journeymen after all, and that they should be allowed to join the unions as now. Evidence would be led in this direction. As regarded clause 9, it was contended that the groundwork should be riveted. He trusted that, when the Board heard the evidence which would be laid before it, it would be able to render such decision as would enable the parties to work on amicably together in the future. The Chairman said that the Board had better now hear the views of the employers on the question before it, as it might obviate the discussion of various points, until the Board had before it what both parties wanted. Unless this were done, the Board might be hearing evidence which would be unnecessary. Mr. Turner asked, the Chairman whether the Board wished to take the clauses seriatim. He suggested that the matters should be taken clause by clause, and evidence led on each, so that the Board might gather the whole facts. The Chairman pointed out that if the matters were taken seriatim they might have the same witness examined twenty times. Mr. Bridger said that he was strongly in favour of taking the points at issue seriatim, and clearing up as they went. Unless this were done the Board would be quite at sea as to really what were the points in dispute. The Chairman said that the best way would be for the employes to call evidence on each point, and then- the manufacturers to give their reasons against. Mr. Bridger said that he desired to draw attention to a statement reiterated by Mr. Arnold— "that the dispute was between two registered bodies." That was not so; it was between the Manufacturers' Association and the employes working for them. Mr. Ferguson said that the award of the Court would bind all, not only present members of the Union, but prospective members. Mr. Milligan said that the whole of the correspondence on the matter had been addressed by the Manufacturers' Association to himself as secretary of the Federated Bootmakers' Union. That showed, as Mr. Arnold had stated, that the dispute was between two registered bodies. Mr. Turner, representing the Manufacturers' Association, said that he did not wish to traverse the statements of Mr. Arnold. He had had a very difficult duty to perform, and had done it well. As a whole, he had put the matters fairly, but there wore one or two circumstances which the Board ought to know. The Union, he might point out, withdrew the statement under which they had worked for years and were now working. To this the employers objected that there were two parties to that agreement, and that both should be consulted before the statetnent was withdrawn. He might state at once, for the information of the Board and the employes, that they would not for one moment negotiate with outside persons; nor would they deal with any one outside the persons employed by them. Mr. Chalmers said that this was not a very conciliatory statement. Mr. Turner said the statement was drawn up for five years, and was in force during that period. Mr. Arnold said that he understood that Mr. Turner had stated that, whatever might be the decision of the Board, the Manufacturers' Association would deal with no one who was not in their employ. Mr. Turner said, as regarded the skilled-labour question, Mr. Arnold had said all employed in the manufacture of boots should be regarded as skilled labour. Now, the Auckland strike proved that there were a number of boys who had been working, and who were not fitted to take up the work of journeymen, but had to go as improvers. Any one who knew the trade knew that there were departments that a man could learn in an hour whilst others required years to become acquainted with. There, therefore, could be nothing in Mr. Arnold's contention. As to the individual right of the employer to employ whom he chose, and the right of the workmen to take what work lie liked, he took it this was the individual right of all. The workmen exercised this right, and all that the employers wanted was the same. It was a well-known fact that in Christchurch men

XXXII