CARGO THIEVES AT WORK

Hokitika Guardian, 23 December 1920, Page 3

CARGO THIEVES AT WORK

OPERATIONS IN AUSTRALIA. SOME SENSATIONAL STATEMENTS Some remarkable disclosures relative to cargo pilfering in Australia were recently made in the Federal Senate by Senator Earle, of Tasmania. He based his remarks upon published statements dealing with this question. These statements included an assertion that the toll exacted by waterfront workers exceeded £500,000 a year, and, taking into nccount the petty pilfering, it would probably make the total over £1,000,000. It was also alleged that there was an organised gang of thieves

i operating on wharves." A challenge was given to the waterfront workers to I deny these-statements, and it was further stated that, as far as could ■ be , learned, tile Waterside Workers’ Fed- | oration took no steps to cull out the criminals from its ranks. But members who were caught redhanded and 1 again sought work hnd to he picked, j I and ship and cargo owners dared not j point a finger at such men. The stigma, said Senator Earle, was most seri- 1 ous upon waterside work, but it affected Australia as a whole, and whether a j man was*a member of. Parliament, or n ; member of the Waterside Workers’ . Federation, he should see to it that in- , vestigation was made to determine' whether these statements were true or untrue, and then act on the finding. Three parties should be active in securing • investigation—the Commonwealth Government, the State Government, and tlie union. There were people who inferred «that some of the police acted in collusion with these thieves,,and that such goods as pianos could riot be otherwise stolen from the wharves. ' There was a case in which a boot manufacturer, to prevent thefts, had dispatched all left-foot hoots by one ship and all

right-foot boots by another ship. Two cases of each consignment had disappeared. This seemed to indicate that there was a combination of thieving extending Tieyond the limits of Australia. He suggested that the Commonwealth Government should communicate with the State Governments, and ask if there was any truth in the statements, and that those Governments should make investigation as to the matter in eluding the police supervision of the wharf. AN ALARMING STATEMENT. j

The Minister for'Defence, Senator Pearce, said that Senator Earle had done well to direct attention to this alarming statement. If there was such an illicit disappearance of goods it constituted a heavy strain upon trade, and certainly was a stigma on the name of Australia and particularly that section of Australian labor working upon the wharves. He did not follow Senator Searle in his statement that there were three parties concerned. If tlie charges were true, they were a challenge of the police control by the States, and there must he a charge of ineptitude against the police. The control of the Customs was not against thieving, but against smuggling. He would bring the suggestion that the State Governments should he communicated with before the Cabinet, but if the position was so had it was remarkable the commercial community | had not secured investigation by the ■ .States before this. Perhaps it was de- ; terred from acting by fear or reprisals. No self-respecting organisation, whether of labor or capital, should sit quiescent under such charges, and one I would.expect at least some denial arid an attempt to clear the Waterside 1

Workers’ Federation and its members by that organisation. He had beard that detectives placed on vessels took their lives in their hands, that if they went into the hold of a ship there was a danger of falling cases, and if the circumstance were as stated it could be seen that there was a possibility that the matter would receive early con- j sideration. j