THE WANAKA TROUBLE

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 795, 19 April 1910, Page 6

THE WANAKA TROUBLE

WHARF LABOURERS PROSECUTED. SOME INTERESTING EVIDENCE. "HOOKS," AND BAG CAEGOES. Tho sequel to the trouble which occurred on the Union Steam Ship Company's steamer Wanaka at Wellington in February last, when a number of men refused to continue discharging that vessel's cargo of cement unless they were allowed to use their "hooks," was the appearance in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. W. E. Haselden, SJkl., of George G. Farland, assistant secretary of the Wharf Labourers' Union, charged with aiding and abetting a strike, and of 49 others, who were charged with having participated in a .strike. Mr. C. E. Aldridge prosecuted on behalf of the Labour Department; . Mr. O'Eegan appeared, for all the defendants save one, Dowdall, who defended himself. Mr. O'Eegan, referring to a suggestion that all the cases should be taken together, that the merits of tho whole be decided on one case, contended that there were really classes of defendants. The cessation of work below involved, automatically, the cessation of work on deck, while the position of those in Nos. 1 and 2 holds was different from those in Nos. 3 and 4. He suggested that a representative case from each class be taken, and the merits of the whole decided on these. Mr. Dowdall Objects. Mr. Dowdall objected, and, with the' statute open in front of him, then rose and proceeded to address the Court, when he was interrupted by Mr. Haselden, who ordered him to resumo his seat. "I have heard of you, Mr. Dowiiall, and know you to be a man of ability. Bat you must not attempt to over-awe me, or make long speeches. ■ You will have every reasonable opportunity of being heard in your defence, and the Court will do its best to assess the merits of tho case, and decide impartially." Mr. Dowdall sat down. After further discussion it was agreed to taie his case first, such of tho evidence in his case as appertained to the others to be taken into account in assessing the merits of tho whole.

Mr. Aldridge, in his statement of the case for the. prosecution, said that the Wanaka arrived in Wellington on Saturday, February 26.. JJer cargo included a quantity of cement in bags, from Auckland. A number of men were engaged to discharge the cargo and commenced work at 9.30 a.m., instructions being given that no hooks were to be used in handling the bags. About 10 ajn. two of the men in one of the holds were observed to be using hooks. They were ordered up and discharged. Work , then proceeded without interruption till noon, when the men knocked off for dinner. On resuming at 1 pjn. one of the men told, the officer in charge of the unloading operations that the men intended to use hooks. The officer replied that no hooks were to be used. The men then went below, and immediately after the commencement of work one of the men in No. 1 hold was seen to use his hook. He was ordered to desist. The nest thing that happened was that ho and the others in No. .1 hold ceased work and came up on deck. Simultaneously tho men in No. 2, 3, and 1 holds ceased work, and they all left the ship and collected on tho wharf, where they stood for several minutes. The-assistant secretary. of the union (G. G. Farland), as representing tho men, tho/i intimated to the labour foreman in charge of tie Wanaka's unloading operations that the men would return to work if hooks were permitted, and received a reply to the effect that' would not be permitted. The men did not return to work. Some of them were asked to go back and shift the cargo and replace tho hatches, but they declined.

Hooks Prohibited in Bag Cargoes. It was well known, continued Mr. Aldridge;. that hooks were not permitted in the handling of bag cargo, especially cement The Union S.S. Company had suffered considerable loss through damage to bag cargo' sustained by' the use of hooks. In issuing each a prohibition the company had done nothing unusual.. The order was a perfectly reasonable one, and-hence, contended Mr. Aldridge, <a legal one. The men were bound to obey. : . . ■ ■ Mr. Haselden: Has this question of hooks ever been discussed in the Arbitration Court or at the Conciliation BoardJ Mr. Aldridge: I think not. Mr. Haselden: Then I might decide one way and tho Arbitration Court the other way. ■. : ■ ■ "..... Mr. Aldridge, continuing, said,that the action of the men" on that particular day had placed the company in an awkward position, sinco the law did not allow of men being engaged after noon. Several thousand sheep were waiting to be taken on board. The conduct of the men clearly showed that their action was concerted, and'taken with the object of compelling the company to concede the point at issue. It was, in effect, a strike' within the meaning of the Act, as the motive of the Act was, to quote the language of the Btatute, "with intent to induce or compel an employer to agree to- terms of employment" Mr. O'Bogan dissented, and, quoting authorities, argued that combination before the cessation of work must be proved in' order to establish the point that such cessation was an act of striking.

Prank Hqwell Lawrence, third officer on the Wanaka, in the course of his evidence, stated that he was the officer in charge of the unloading operations on the occasion in question. He could not say whether Dowdall was engaged er not. An Option for Mr. Dowdall. Mr. Haselden: Does Mr. Dowdall want to have his case dismissed now, or does ho wish to fight it? Mr. Dowdall: I rnmt a fight to a finish, your Worship. . Mr. Haselden: Ton needn't say so, but if you choose, you may say whether or not you were engaged in the unloading of the Wanaka on this particular occasion. Mr. Dowdall intimated that he would prefer to state the fact when giving evidence. • ■••.• "^ The examination of the third officer was continued. There .was, he said, a good deal of growling among the : men because of tho prohibition of the hooki He heard nothing till the resumption of work at 1 p-m., when one man, in tho hearing of the others, said that if they could not use the hooks they might as well knock off. This man was subsequently observed to be using his hook in No. 1 hold. Witness called down the hold, "Stop using that hook, or knock off." The man dropped his hook, and held a conversation with the others. The next firing that, happened was that all the men in No. 1 hold came on deck. The woTd was passed by them to No. 2 hold, the men in' which appeared on deck about five minutes after,' followed, after a brief period, hy those in Nos. 3 and i. No more cement was discharged that day. To Mr. Haselden: Since he joined the ship in January he had not seen hooks permitted on bag cargoes. He had no previous experience of bag cement cargo in New Zealand. Some Ends of bag cargo were handled with hookschaff, potatoes, grain. Union Official Congratulates the Men. He knew G. Farland (assistant secretary of the union). He saw him on the wharf subsequently, and heard him say:, "Let mo congratulate you 'men > on the way you hare stuck together. Thafs the only way." To Mr. Dowdall:'Hia instructions were that anyone using hooks was to be brought up from the holds. He did not receive a bonus if the cargo were discharged "clean." John Foster, chief officer of the Wanaka, said that the officers in charge of the hatches were instructed to see tlat the men did not nee hooks. On tho day in question, about 10 a.m., he noticed two men in No. i hatch using hooks. He reported them to Captain Stott,'who ordered them out of the hold. After that, matters proceeded along all right till noon, with ono exception. Mr. Haseldon: What was the exception? The witness, in reply, related that he heard Farland, the assistant secretary, say to the mon of No. 3 hatch that they should use hooks, explaining to him (witness), afterwarda, that. Mr. Holmes,

manager of tie Cement Company, had given the permdssioiL He (witness) told Farland that Holmes had nothing to do with it, and that he should not speak to the men on the ship. Farland said he- wouldn't. Later, Iβ saw Farland conversing with.the men of No. i hatch, and caught the word "hooks," but whether he waa encouraging or prohibiting the use of hooks he conld not say. Hooks and "Lugs." hatch told those m No, 2 that they had knocked oil because they were not ediowed to use hooks. About a quarter of an hour elapsed before the men in-both hatches had ceased work. It was not the custom to use hooks on cement bags, as lugs were provided on the bags for handling them. He aid not consider the men had any reasonable ground to refuse J° . wo rk tor not being allowed to use their hooks. His Worship: Could you have handled the cement with hooks without doing any injury P-lf the hooks were used in the lugs oi the bags damage might possibly have been avoided. Is not the objection to the use of hooks due more to the improper use of hooks tnan to tneir proper use? —Yes Witness also said he had never known j>l Hooks being used on bags of cement lie best way of handling cement to place the bags in the slings was by hand. What is the second best way?—By the proper use of hooks. "Don't You Daro!" Witness, replying to Mr. Dowdall, said he had been at sea for twenty years Defendant desired to know what routes W1^ ess ,.£ ad been ™gaged on. His Worship said he did not think such information was necessary. .&#^ tt : h "*" ■'"*":•' yf^SSfc^»^ witak, h daU: : thougJlt it: was the witness who was speaking to me. I want a direct answer to a direct <,ues-

Bis Worship ruled that there was an oauunr for witness to answeTthelue* .Witness said the cargo under notice Defendant put another lengthy question, to witness regarding thTXS mmm chemical aspect of the question" .. a t %^ o f a,^ri not hanging oa to Mr. DowdaU: I know yon weren't Xou are not competent to do so?

A Question to Consider. of anj rase ormen's hands being h≥ tit*®™ 3 « ■"^β The niagistraie: It eeeme to be agreed properly used by. some men ""' Add I object . has the right to say to not use this aid to your work hJw* g»tter that m.. 4 reasonable "oW^S Badly' Holed. Francis Holmes, agent for the Now Zealand Portland Cement Company S consignee of the cargo of cementP& ft§ case, said' he gave no instructions abort containing .bags that were badly hol«f Parlondjdmitted that they werV hotd .^KJ^d?© s k tte seams. ]g replied: ;"No.». There : preTioo^ engaged -the '.inen for unloading the Wanaka - Hβ told them .not to . use hooks. Later, he saw the men in No- 3 psmg.hooks, and told them not to, saymg they .would have .to knock off ii they .told that to all hatches, but as. "".as he conld see they kept on Jiang thorn. Two men were discharged for usage.-hooks, and the other men embsequenily ceased work He saw Dowdall ooming up out of No. 1 hold. After the men left, Farland told horn -the j men would come-back if they were allowed to use hooks. He replied that tiey would not be allowed to. • • "Discordant Element" The witness was cross-examined at some length by Mi. Dowdall. The magistrate several times pointed out to Mr DowdaU that some of his questions were unnecessary. His Worship: I may possibly sand tins case to the .Arbitration Court under Section 18, and I want , the Court to have everything that is necessary to form an opinion on the case, but I don't want to embarrass the Court with sheets and sheets of unnecessary evidence. Mr. O'Regan: We could probably make , sufficient admissions to enable you. to state a case.

tl His .Worship: If .*» wold get rid of this discordant element. ; Mr. Dowdall said the poittt was whether he. had takea part m any combined action before the ceasing of wort. The use of hooks was' not the point. The magistrate: Why, the use of hooks is the Whole case! : Captain Stott, local marine superintendent and wharfinger for the Union Company, said it had been a standing order in Wellington, for 20 years pas£ not to use hooks on certain cargoes, in bags, but the men used hooks when they were not seen, ;and the bags were torn. '.', Summary from the Bench. After further examination of the witness,. . ■■' / The,magistrate said: "In order to facilitate the statement of the facts necessary to submit a case for the opinion of the Arbitration Court, I will state what, in my : opinion, the facts are, viz.,' that there , was a general prohibition against wharf labourers using, hooks for ,the discharge of cargo, bat that that prohibition was not'enforced, and that there was a great deal of surreptitious use of hooks to the damage of cargo; further, that the damage to cargo was caused by the careless-and improper use of hooks, and that hooks can be used for most kinds of cargo withonl damage, provided that sufficient care is used; that on February 20 the Wauaka being at the wharf with 600 tons of cement on board a large body of men ' was engaged to discharge her; ,that there was no absolute—mark the word absolute—condition against the use of hooks, but after the work had proceeded a little . while direct orders were given by those in charge that any man using a- hook should be discharged, or knocked off work; that after two men were knocked off, in the morning, work proceeded more or less satisfactorily, until'the afternoon shift came on; that the men, had then probably considered the matter, and decided to use hooks, and that upon the order being, repeated that any man who used a hook was to be J knocked ■ off, and upon the specifio dis-! charge ,of at least two men for using hooks, the other men, in anticipation of their own discharge, knocked . off work and came up; and that this is said to be a strikti, and thai those who joined them afterwards were in the position of assisting in a strite. I will expross no opinion, but that is practically what I shall' submit to the Arbitration Court with the evidence that has beeu takon."

Mr. Aldridge said, that, according to MXeod's evidence, tho order not to use hooks was given before tho men began work. He was scarcely prepared to admit that all the men were given tho option of not using hopkß or ceasing work. The magistrate said ho thought there was no material difference between what he had stated and what Mr. Aldridge would admit. ■ Mr. OTtegan said he was quito prepared to accopt, the magistrate's statement. ' ' Mi. Dowdall said he could not ajreo to tho magistrate's'statement at the present stage. Ho wished to .call witnesses. Tho magistrate adjourned tho case until 10.30 this morning.