JUDGE AND COUNSEL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 284, 25 August 1908, Page 6

JUDGE AND COUNSEL.

QUESTION OF MITICATION. MR. WILFORD ON THE BAKERS' STRIKE. Mr. T. M. Wilford, who appoared for a number of tho bakers charged with striking before the Arbitration Court yesterday, soared to high dramatic heights occasionally in his defence of tho men's cause, and kopt tho proceedings at a high tension for half an hour; but Mr. Justicc Sim revealed himself as a cold, incisive critic, altogether lacking in dramatic appreciation. Mr. Wilford, in defending Jesso Harlen, charged with talcing part in a strike, swooped upon an error in the information. Ho urged that the case against Harlen must bo dismissed, because the summons referred to " June 29, since and including," whereas his client struck on June 28 (Sunday). If io was proved that lie had struck on Sunday, Mr. Wilford urged that ho could not have struck on Monday, a strike being a single act. ' His Honour asked whether it waß not merely a question of amending the information. Mr. Wilford submitted that it was too late for this, since the prosecution had closed its case. His Honour stated that _ the information could be amended at any time. His Honour asked if the Arbitration Court was to havo smaller powers with regard to amendment than a Justice of the Peace. The respondent then gave evidence that he should have gone to work at 6 p.m. on Sunday, and did not go. After further discussion, his Honour said thero was no doubt that the Court had power to x amend the information. The respondent would be charged with committing the offenco either on August 28 or 29. Ho supposed that the question of tho 28th or 29th would not affect the penalty in any way. Mr. Wilford (with great dramatic energy): "I think if your Honour pleases this- is a time to say something about this strike, and I shall take this opportunity, because I -think it will bo tho only ono available." Mr. Wilford went on to. recite tho history of tho Court's awards in Hawko's Bay and elsewhere, previous to the Wellington bakers' award. In all tho other bakers' cases the Court s had recognised 48 hours as a week's work, but what was practically a special award-was made for bakers within a five miles radius of tho Wellington General Post Office. Then tho disturbance was created. Tho men met and discussed tho position. They could not see, and it was very hard to convince him that a 48 hours' week should be worked in other districts, and a week of 51 hours in' Wellington. His Honour here interjected calmly: "We don't want any criticism from you, Mr. Wilford, of what the Court has done in tho mattor._ If you havo anything to say in mitigation of your client's offence it is quite competent for you to say it. There has boon a good deal of criticism of, tho Court outside, but wo do not allow criticism in the Court of what the Court has done. All wo can hear from you now is on the question of what penalty shall be inflicted."- ' Mr. Wilford: May I go on on this ground P

His Honour: You must havo been very badly advised. I happen to remember something of tho circumstances, and the story you havo been telling is far from the truth as I remember it. \

Mr. Wilford said he was repeating what he had been informed by his clients. Mr. Wilford was proceeding, when his Honour onco more interjected that he could not bo allowed to criticise an award.

Mr. Wilford: Then may I submit for mitigation of the penalty' that my clients aro human beings, and being human boings'and full of human nature, they were so worked up by tho award that their feelings overcame them.

His Honour: I don't desire you to take that attitude at all. If you are going to talk in that wa\ 4 we can't hoar you. Mr. Wilford : Would you allow me to say that because of the action of the employers these men wero forced to do what they did? Would that bo a mitigation? His Honour said that Mr. Wilford ought to know what could bo rightly urged by way of mitigation. Wilford: I thought you would allow Die tho largest latitude in-these cases, I want to say that these men took a ballot . ■ ?r* s S?. nour: know about tljat, - Mr. Wilford: 'I want to tell-your Honour moro than the Court knows. Some of the employers, he continued, offered tho mon a 48 hours week, and were willing to agreo to their terms, but others, would not meet tnopij and insisted on tho award being earned out. Would it be unfair to urge that that attitude of. a section of the employers drovei the; men to strikof Would that be a right thing to urge in extenuation on thoir behalf? Ho had m his hand a petition setting torth tho requirements of tho men, to which certain of the employers had agreed. fW <fe nt *a»t to go into that, Mr. Wilford. Havo you anything to say in regard to Harlen s particular case? Mr. Wilford: Yes. I desire to say that Harlen was one of a number who felt it was impossible to come to terms with certain of th.e employers. He therefore joined with tho other operatives ill going out. Mr. Wilford stated that his clients had received letters from certain of tho master bakers accepting evoi-ything they wanted. When tho rest of the master bakers would not agree to thoso terms_ the men struck. Ho would urge, therefore, that the circumstances were peculiar and very trying. Attempts were made by conciliatory methods, to come to an arrangement, and thero was a dissension between the master bakers themselves, and that caused the disruption./ On one occasion lie was told, a certain attitude was taken up by one master baker against the rest, without even consulting the other masters.