A SEAMAN’S CLAIM.

Hokitika Guardian, 20 November 1925, Page 1

A SEAMAN’S CLAIM.

VF.ItDICT FOli DEFENDANT. [BV lII.KOItAPn —VKIt Pit ESS ASSOCIATION.} AFCKEAND, Nov. 111. Wrongful dismissal was alleged o\ Hubert Itei-li, a seamen from the Matakana (Mr liolmden) in proceeding; against 11. I*. Thurston, master ot the vessel (Mr It. MeVeagh) in the -Magistrate's Conn to-day. on a charge ol discharging him without having (Attained proper authorisation in accordance \t ii It Ihe Merchant and Shipping

|)i>isk slated, in evidence, that lie hail signed cii the Mai aka na in J.ondoll for three year-. Willi oilier seamen. he recently went on strike, and .served a soMtenee of one months' iniprisonnicnl, which terminated lasi Friday. lie had liccn informed that he lmd hoen discharged from the ship on September S. Mr MeVeagh: With other members of the crew you decided to |)Ut rnmpulsion on the shipowner-.'

I’lainl ill': fes. •111 other words it was a rmmiiyr' “Not exactly that." •‘lt was at least grave instihordin ation ?’’

■ k os. Mr McVeaglt .submitted that Doisk had not proved his allegations. He contended that the conditions of discharge as provided in the Merchant Hupping Act referred to a mutual agreement between the master and the seaman. Thee did not apply to a discharge resulting From serious insubordination. The master of a ship wax entitled to discharge a seaman found guilty of grave misconduct. Mr Tfolmden said that the discharge should have been endorsed by the Superintendent ol Marine. Mr MeVeagh: “ft was a conspiracy against the shipowners. Mr Hohnden: “Tie paid the penal-

l ' Mi- MeVeagh: ‘The employer-’ loss was €3OO a day. The .Magistrate: “The men cantt ti this country and refused to work, fhey have a jovous time ashore except v. he they are in gaol. H appears tins man deliberately broke Ids contract and now has the impudence to ask lot the captain to be penalised. 1 am not going ,o do it I think the captain was unite richt. . , Tlie ease was dismissed, costs being allowed to the defendant. Another ease, arising out ot >hstrike was heard before Mr Hunt when two seamen. Wallaee Bowden and John Whitehead, (Mr Fraser) each claimed pin wages from the master ot the . < aka„a for work done from September =tb to October SthMr Fraser submitted that the plaintiffs were entitled to payment even though they had refused to take the Whitehead gave evidence regarding the work, extending over a month. The Magistrate: "Did you take tn ship to sea ?" “So.” • “Did you refuse?” The Magistrate: “The judgment ifor the defendant. You did not. do vour duty.” , . .. Mr Fraser entered an objection. The Magistrate: “I got- out of him in a minute what might have taken

you half an hour. I am not going to allow him one penny piece.” Mr Fraser: ‘‘On what grounds r The Magistrate. ‘‘On the grounds already given. You can appeal if you think there is anything in it.” Judgment was entered for the defendant with costs.