SKA COOK V. UNION.

Hokitika Guardian, 25 June 1926, Page 2

SKA COOK V. UNION.

WELLINGTON, June 24. The hearing of claims totalling £6G7 by John James Stuart, sea cook, against -Mr Young, Secretary of the Seamen’s Union, and the Union, was continued to-day, when plaintiff’s caso was concluded.

Opening for the defence, Mr P. J. O’llegan said that it was only when the ship came to Wellington that Young realised the whole situation was Ivoing left to him. He soon found, after an interview with the Captain, that it was useless to try to get both men back. Young was sore with Gra-., ham for precipitating the trouble, as Graham was an executive member of the Union, but had acted purely as an individual. Charles ,Fitters (President of tho Wellington Seamen’s Union) stated he heard Young on more than one occasion advise Freeman, Graham and Riley to go hack on the Tees. On each occasion tile firemen had replied that they were not disposed to go back unless Stuart was discharged. Mr Mazengarb contended it was clear the actions of the men were to induce the owners to discharge the cook, or, secondly, to refuse to take him into their service again. It mattered not whether Young knew that the cook was in the service at the time or not. Quite apart- from any conspiracy submitted, there was aiding and abetting -on tho part of Young, and that his attitude more than merely encouraged the men in their actions. Mr P. J. O’Regan contended that there was not one tittle- of evidence implicating either the Seamen’s Union or Y T oung. His Honour intimated that lie would give judgment on Saturday,