SEQUEL TO PAPAROA STRIKE.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1466, 14 June 1912, Page 4

SEQUEL TO PAPAROA STRIKE.

FinilEN WATERSIDE WORKERS CHARGED.' ■. '■/■■ ■ ' .. (By. T^lcstaplJ.—Press AseoclatioiU ft' Auckland, Juno 13:■ A' farther' sequel to (ho strike 0:1 t'iuj , steamer P-aparea in Auckland on Novem-/:. bcr 21 last was the appearance of fifteen- . ' waterside workers before Mr. C. C. Kettle,. ■ S.M., at tlio Magistrate's Court. Each man';was charged separately with being a party/; I to the strike, ami in each case pleas ,'ofs not guilty wero entered. jMr. Selwyn Mays conducted the prosee'u- v " . : ticn. Mr.jß. l'\ Way appeared for .the;.'.?/, /; defendants. '-1 J. •B. Jacobs, Thomas' Ferguson, JO. Hook,. Carl ifoiler, T. E. liinton, C. 1 -: : ■ Holmes, G. Hanigaa, Joseph Riehardr.ia, and Robert: Robertson, all told similar stories when they entered. the. witnessbox.' The effect of their statements was ■■■■■'■/;/ that at about 11 o'clock on tho morning »•:-fj3 of November 21 rain interfered with dis-//.■/;/: charging operations, and the men accord-''-! ::/£ ingly stopped work. Some of them went to j the union room for a while, and others 'i/iV went home, but they all denied-that they •/;//? took part in any meeting that day. Ua '' ■the following day they came to work ns?-':;;.;,/. usual, but were informed that a grievance .: was being discussed in the meeting-room, '■£&$, .find no work wns to be done until tho. : '/. matter was settled. Each man denied that lie participated in the proceedings atcither meeting or in any way was partv to thelO's-l strike. ; In the course of his judgment Mr. Kettle ' Vsi said ho believed, the men to bo honest, and.; •she thought they wero telling the truthW/when they said they wero not parties to'/--. j/ the:-, strike. He held they went io the."-,. 'wharves on the'morning of the 22nd tov- ■ i;irork,' and- not to declare a strike, llo.thought, he would be doing.tho men aV. gross injustice if he did not believe them," ■■■ ami, on tho contrary, "no did believe : r tliem.v His Worship dismissed the charges"in each ease. ■ '■■■■■ ff. Robert -Ainsworth admitted that tho 1 onestion of obtaining extra pay hid been • ; discussed by some of tho men on I lie 2t!th, . 'the,''day■■ before work-was suspended. Wit-fioss-.and same others intended to ask for an'increase,iri/.tho. rate;of-pay,-but they . '<l' 9J ln d#that'so,meono : .had'«nticlpated them ■ | and. asked' for.morc: money.'. Ho did attend 1 meetings"held in connection with the nist-k,.?r»-:-.bnt„he, said he- would havo gone to ' ; ivorkvas.-/nsnal■ whether the increase hadbeen gri-.nteiUor not. Ainsworth said lie " - ;xvas ! -nof a-party-to the trouble, and be -v.; -thai-.he was against strikes. fc//' . v'iiiis.: case,"Mr. Kettle said, was some- i ..what different from the others. His Wor&nipf!,wns- { not- impressed with the way"®S . had. given his evidence, but, at ;:tho-same .'time ne was doubtful if Ams-/.tSs.f jworth-.was a party to tho strike. He wouid "givo.the' man the -benefit of tho doiibt,?/»3v' iand dismiss tho charge. . ?:■ Tlios., Woodward admitted that he stended^tho meetings and moved certain r'.oii® resolutions;- He said he did not go ion tha-Paparoa because ho considered the .-.work'dirty, 1 , and ho thought mora money - •• should l» paid tor tho work. yK/'-S': Mr. Kettle thought it was clear that /Woodward did not return to work because 'Vis/ /lie thought.more money should be paidji'V.'./ !for;..iho,work.v:Woodward wns th". leader ■.■pfjlhn.,/meeting,'' and tho iv-ulatioa eon- ../ .' ve'yed to .Messrs.' Xearing- and Co.. asking, jfor).;an..increase'in pay, was '••to*'a' declaration, to..strike.- His Worship/."Vj,;; i:i!iic(-.'il a fins of -£:'i. . 111'.'ho case of 0. Donald, who did not i.avpeiir, Mr.-Kettle, said hi* was rue : the liien whoso names were recorded as'-::'■};£• '• being'nre'sent .at Iho meeting on the ■ llisWorship had tio doubt tlint D-mnitl :.wa<i"influenced by Coliett, the - secret/try,■/£./.. and''one or two other men, ,- including '%■'■< ■'' Woodward. A tine of .CI wns inflicted. v His Worship thought ft similar, positinn ''.nMeil-i'l the case of Charles Peterson, '■' v ' ''.loseph'Shcrer. and \V. iJcvoiiport, ra-'a man was lined -i:'. : 'I'he question of costs, m each case was /j j'a'dipuriied.:-., ■ ■~./'; jr r . \\;iv gave nonce ot appeal m rach ;■ .■: 'case'.'-and Mr. IWtlc, in grantin;; li-avo ' i. to apiicai, said ho woula give every j: : facilit'v to enalilo the cases io bo further ,« : 'ventilated in tho Arbitration Court.