MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2770, 13 May 1916, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

WAS IT A STRIKE?

FERRY STEAMER HELD UP

As a result of the hold-up of the ferry steamer Maori at Wellington or the night of March 17 last, the Inspector of Awards yesterday proceeded in the "Magistrate's Court against several of the.firenion, who were employed on the vessel on that jkte, claiming in every case a penalty of'.£lo for',an'; alleged breach- of agreement. - The proceedings - were "takeny'on' "the" ground that the defendants on March 1.7, 1916, becamo party to ,i strike by the J:*cmen and 'trimmers of the s.s. Maori at Wellington, such firemen and trimmers being bound by an industrial agreement, namely, the Wellington Seamen's- and i'irenien's (Australasian Federated Seamen's Union) Agreement, dated February 20, 1911., The firemen named-were:*'.A.'Forman, If. Fowlds, W; Fafrow, M."Colvin, D. Doss, and D. Smith. ; The case against Ross was considered to differ from the otlwrs, anil was taken first. Mr. W. 6. Riddell, S.M., occupied the Bench. Mr. ,I'. S. K. Macassey, of' the Crown Law Office; appeared for the inspector, while Mr. P. 'J. O'licgan appeared for Ross.'. Mr. Macassey said that the proceedings were, taken under Section 5 of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. i'l'ho facts in connection with the caso w ere: that on "March 15 last the Maori »-a's in Wellington, and a man, named Lodder, was ordered to clean out. the firemen's quarters, about which there had been complaints from time to time. Instead of doing as he had been tjild to' do, Lodder became drunk, and he ioas later dismissed. On the following'evening,, at Lyttelton, the firemen interviewed the second engineer, and demanded the limine, of tha man who had informed on Lodder. Failing to gain the name of the informer, the firemen announced that they were dissatisfied, and before the ship left for Wellington tliey gave twenty-four hours' notice of their intention to leave the ship. They left the ship in Wellington tho next day with the result that 120 pas. ssngers were held up in this port, while 300 ■ passengers" were held .up in Lyttclton ond . Christchurch . over the- week-end. Contfsfuiitg, Mr. Macassey. said the position with these firemen amounted to this: They seemed to think that tliey had the power to stick up a ship when they liked and how they liked. In the present instance the men had no grievance bo far as their own. work was concerned. They simply went on strike because.tho name of tho. informer-was-not-given to them.'lt was submitted that these firemen had acted in a most improper manner, and had been able to hold up tha ship, to the great inconvenience and financial loss -of -the passengers. It might be contended that they', did .what they, were entitled to do, namely, gave twenty-four hours' notice. Mr. Macassey submitted,' however, that where men acted in concert for the purpose of securing their demands from the employers that that constituted a strike. It' was not necessary that there should be any breach of contract to constitute a strike. As authority for. this statement, he quoted the judgment of His Honour Mr. Justice Sim in the Canterbury slaughtermen's strike.

Alexander Invararity, second engineer on the steamer Maori, proved the statements mado' by Mr. Maeassey- in his oponing remarks in regard to tho interview, with the firemen at Lyttelton 011 the evening of March 16. At Ihe close of tho interview tho firemen threatened to stick up the ship, and gave the witness verbal notice. Witness referred them to tlio chief engineer. Boss 'was among tlio number giving notice, and he had not previously given notice." .

To Mr. O'llegan: The Maori's engineroom complement was 27, comprising IS firemen, 9 trimmers, and three greasers. As far as lie (witness) could rem'emljer about fifteen left 011 March 17.

Samuel M'Dowell, chief engineer on tho Maori, /?ave evidence that nine firemen and five trimmers came to his cabin at r.yttelton about 8.10 p.m. 011 March 16. and gave notice to lonve. They first of all demanded the name of the "skunk" who had informed 011 Lodder, and, en the refusal to give a name, they announced their intention of leaving the ship in Wellington. Hennessey was the spolresman of tho party, and the others expressed themselves in agreement with what Hennessey had said.

Mr. O'Hegan said that Boss's defeneo was that, if there was a striko among llio men, lie was no party to it, mid that lie intended to leave the ship in Welling, toil in any case. His story was—and it would he corroborated—that he saw tlio men going along towards the second engineer, when he (Hoss) passed by on. his way to give notico to the chief engineer. David Ross, fireman, residing in Wellington, declared that he knew nothing nf the trouble that had arisen over tho dismissal of Lodder, nor did lie know on March 1(i that nny of the'.firemen "intended to leave tho ship. He had made up his mind to leave tho ship on March 17, because' he was expecting his .wife to arrive in Wellington by the Euapehu

on March iB. He visited the chief engineer about four minutes to 8 -o'clock, and personally gave notice of his intention to leave. ■

The chief engineer, on being recalled, denied that Ross had called at his room alone to give notice on the; evening oi March 16.

Mr. O'ltcgan submitted that the evidence was clearly in favour of tlio defence that Ross had intended to leave the ship apart from; any action taken, by the other men. In any case it was submitted that Eos had a right to terminate his contract by. giving. notice, and that the right was not forfeited by reason of the fact that numbers of others gave, notico at the same time. : The Magistrate reserved decision. - Jlr. ! ltfacnssey submitted.' that as no' de« fence had been filed in the other cases, and as the proceedings were civil, ho had a right to enter judgment by default. He proposed to'waive the right, however, and to call formal evidence. After the evidence had berii tendered in.the.cases of ll.,l''owlds and W. Farrow, the other cases were adjourned until Wednesday next. ■ - . , ' CRUELTY TO,A CAT. Mr. D. G. A. Coopj'r, S.M., dealt with the usual list of cases yesterday in tho Magistrate's Court/ Henry Randell was, ,011 tho information of tho S.P.C.A., charged with cruelly ill-treating a.cat.on April 4. Mr. 1(. H. /Webb appeared for the prosecution.. , i'l'he evidence showed that the defendant had thrown the. aliimai from tho Sea. inpa's Mission Building into tlio road inthe direction of the Telephone Exchange.. When picked up by some passers-by, the ■ animal was in a bad way. . A fino of i£s was imposed,, tho costs and expenses adding a further sum of .£1 18s. to the penalty. Default was fixed at one month.s imprisonment, but the defendant was allowed li days ia which to find the money. LIQUOR FOR SOLDIERS. Thomas Driscoll did not appear to answer a charge of having supplied threo soldiers with intoxicating liquor on April 23, when the liquor supplied was intended for. consumption, off the premises where it Was sold. The, Magistrate imposed- a fine of £5, with costs 7s. Default was fixed at one month's imprisonment. PRESENT-WHEN LIQUOR WAS SEIZED. Several defendants were, convicted ol being found on unlicensed premises at a time when the police seized liquor at such premises. A. soldier named Georgu M'Donald Pollock was discharged without penalty. David Gage and Arthur Gorham were ■ fined' XI each, while Ernest Hail and George Henisley were fined 10s. caoli, In all four instances Court costs 7s. were added to the fine. BY-LAWS, ETC. Failure to observe the statutory halfholiday resulted in proceedings being takeii against the occupiers'of two diller: ent shops. Violet Woodhouse, a tobacconist, wps fined £ 1 and' ordered to pay Court costs 7s. ,J. Johnston, .as the person in charge of a chemist's shop, was fined 10s., ivith Court costs 7s. On a charge of Sunday trading, Jseil Austin was lined ,£l, with costs 7s. Ja.no Martin, an assistant in . Austin s shop, was fined 10s., with costs 75., for transact, ing business oil Sunday. As tho owners of stock found wandering in public streets, H. T. TonUs and Percy Bennett were fined ss. each, aud ordered to pay costs of Court). Cecil Sutclilf and John Alfred Shirley were fined' ss. eacli for having no tail lights on their motor-cars. In each casoCour.t costs (75.) was added to the fine. George Masloin was fined 10s., w.'th costs 75., for allowing a chimney to catch fire on premises of which 'lie was the occupier. James M'Parland, for a similar breach of tho city by-laws, was fined 55., with l costs 7s. William Harold Taylor was lined 10s., with costs 75., for failing to register u doij of which he was the owner. Richard Duffy, who made a'connection with l the water service first obtaining tho necessary permit t] i 0 City Engineer's department, was fined J!l, ami ordored to pny an additional amount of 7s. for Court costs ' 1 Emily Thomas, the occupier of a shop in Cambridge Tcrracc, was charged with being the owner of a dangerous dog, and with keeping a house of ill-fame, > n ™ n " t.rayontion' of the city by-laws. Both cases were adjourned after partial hearing.. Mr. J. ,J. M'Grath appeared for tho defendant. , . OTHER CASES. Percy Frederick Ellison, a youth in tho employ.'of a local, dairy company, was remanded'for a week on two charges of failing to account to his .employers for moneys received oil their behalf. Evelyn Butler, who was found in the Tramway Hotol during tho currency of a prohibition order in force against her, was lined .El, with costs 7s. A. similar t penalty was imposed in tho case of Allan M'Plice, (i prohibited person, who ventured into tho Clarendon Hotel. In each caso default was fixed at three [ days' imprisonment.

For using threatening behaviour in Courtonay Place, George M'Laughlin. and Patrick Walsh, were fined ,£2' oacli. the

former having: to pay 13s. for costs and witnesses' expenses, and the latter 7s. for costs. Tho each case was seven days' imprisonment. ', ' William- Henry Smith, wlio' was convicted of using indecent' language... at Johnsonville on April 15, was fined -CI, with costs 135., in default to undergo three days' imprisonment. Frederick Bradley, who was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, of hib' failure to attend drill,'was fined £2, with costs 75.,' in default .to undergo seven days' military detefttion.