MISSIONS TO SEAMEN.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1917, 27 November 1913, Page 9

MISSIONS TO SEAMEN.

' (To the Editor.) Kir, —The article published in youT issue of this morning, under tho heading "Sailors'_ Friend Society," places before, the public certain statements that thu 'committee of Iho Missions to Seamen cannot allow to pass unchallenged. The committee have maintained silence and have not appealed to the public during the whole time of the action taken against them by Mrs. Willia-ns hi-Hid Supremo Court. They aro surprised that a similar silence, was jiot maintained now that, they have to appeal. Wo do not propose discussing the ease; ivo simply want to point out: (1) Tho statement "while be (Mr. .Tames Moore) was_a\vay the Wellington Committee appointed hiiother mif sicnev" is incorrect. Tho Wellington Committee have no powee to appoint a imssionor. The parent society snakes all appointments.

i (2) Tiio statement "Mr. Moore retimied to-find his place filled is, Io sav tho least, misleading, Mr. Mooru had dchiiitely resigned in "October, Hill, onil had notified the. parent society, llio Wellington Committee, and Mrs.' Williams of his re.f.igi.uiUon. it is hardly right to use the words'"his place," tho suggestion of the wirprise that awaited Mr. Moore, embodied in the phrase is unwarranted by facts, On Mr. Moore's resignation, Mr, Shell) who had been appointed, by the Loiukm Committee aa locum tenons during Mr. Moore,'s. leavq of absence, was definitely appointed hj that comnirUec, to succeed him. Oil his resignation, Mr. Cocks was'permanently appointed missinner. Of this Mr. Moure was aware, 'lie also kfiew that "by coming out us he did without tho leave of the London coiinniftce he left the service, of the Missions to Seamen. ....

(3) 'flu* statement "(.ho decision. of His Honour tho Chief Justice was in favour of Mrs.' Williams" is but partially correct. Mrs. Williams strove' lo have' Mr. Moore's name put in tho trust deed; her own solicitors.'dropped that point.' 11 is'-Honour did'alter, tho deed'to-iho'rifect that tho missioned should ho subject lo the- approval of tho trustees as a fit .and proper person, to conduct the. mission., Tho trustees purported to disapprove of .M.f. W. .15. Ce(;ksj tho .present inissionev, t without assigning any'rc-issoufor so doihgi' btlir.f tl'ini a 1 desire to rcinstata Mr. .-Moore. Mr. Cocks is a man for tlic.'senrncHj its has-hceu-shown by the testimonials gonniiio seafaring- men have sent him latch-. • The. trustees threw out Mr. Cocks's name arbitrarily,'' hence "the i\p- ' •; '- Tho coniiiiltteif''liavo"no'hostility to 'Mr. Moore, nof-du'tlmy-'want to hamper ■tho work of th&-ne«-wcty; but they are in duty hound.to..lio-iloynl to tlw parent society in England, ami his own. merits have won jt, for Mr, Cock's Unit tho committee should not »llt>V_'aiYy iirterferenco with'liiiu.—faiii, etc.,* "" "" CHAS. IWOWLES;-'■". Hon.' Secretary to' Committee, Missions ■■to Seamen. •Wollingtem.- ■ ; -.,-r'. ■