RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 998, 13 December 1910, Page 5

RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

;— — « _ I '.■ . , (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) . Christohurch, December 12. The . South Island Railway Appeal Board opened its sittings in . Christ- ' church at the Magistrate's " Court this ■-■'■_ morning. Mr. W. R-. Haselden, S.M. .; (chairman of the board), presided. lii the appeal of Peter M'Nab, a fire- . ~ .'. man, against his discharge for having, . it was alleged, been under Hie influence of liquor while on duty, the other members of the board were Messrs.- G. Brown (representing the second division), and J. Gray (Traffic Department). Mr. H. , Davidson appeared for the Department, and Mr. I?. Hampton for the appellant. Evidence was taken, and the decision reserved. ■■'•-"''' John Kerr, train examiner at Rangiora, appealed against his dismissal on .account of alleged intemperate .habits , rendering him unsuitable for retention ~ : in the service. Tho first division was i. -; sspresented by Mr. J. Gray, and tho {- second division'by Mr.-J. H. Jones. Mr. j ■";'.'-. Davidson appeared on behalf of tho De- ). partment, and Mr. Hampton for the ap- ( ■ pellant. ■ The* chairman said that the ■. ' appellant had been fined for a breach of v .''.■'- a 'prohibition order, and . Mr. Hampton £.'-.'- said that ho admitted those facts. After J'",- hearing evidence, the chairman said the ,j : - board were of opinion that in. the inj, , terests of the railway service it should j ':'•' be-very clear and dtcided inlaying at ':> "": ■ once that tho appeal must bs'disihissed. i Everett Chnppell, an elderly man, who J -i: ■ had been dismissed for having, it was }■'' alleged, been under the' influence of f ■'.'"'' liquor while on duty on 'September 13, ! .-' appealed against tho decision of tho Doi' ■'.'■ parfment. The first division was repref. ".. Rented by Mr. C. F. Ryan, 'the North '*.'■■ Island representative, as Mr. Gray was a y. . witness .in the appeal, and the second I'..', division by Mr. M. Eeddington. The i. 'evidence taken in the Departmental in- '. quiry was repeated. It was to the effect that the appellant had been under the ■-'• , influence of liquorwhile on duty at. the Colombo Street level crossing. The ap- '/ pcllant'-s defence was that his condition c- was due to illness and want of sleep. {"■■ • He bad had one glass of port wine on f the way to .work that day. The decision t -.'.' was reserved,