Huntly Magistrate’s Court.

Huntly Press and District Gazette, Volume 3, Issue 6, 22 May 1914, Page 3

Huntly Magistrate’s Court.

The re-hearing of the case in which William Mayland and David Molesworth claimed damages from Stewart Dixon, A. A. Stewart, J. Young and J. Gilmour, as compensation for deprivation of the rights of membership of the Taupiri Coal Miners’ union and the loss of privileges attendant on such membership, came before Mr. E. Raw son, S.M., on Friday when Mr. Gould, of Messrs. Parr and Blomfield. appeared for the plaintiffs and Dr. Bamford lor the defendants. Mr. Gould explained that the authenticity of the minute was an important' point. The Rev. Mr. Evans went to the office of the union and copied an extract from the minute book which showed that Molesworth and others had been expelled from the union and if that, were so, Molesworth must have 'been a member of the union. The Rev. M. J. Evans in evidence stated that he went to the office of the union on the evening of Friday, 27 th. Feby, when he saw the president, Mr S. Dixon, the secretary, Mr E. Mac Kay, Mr. J. Gilmeur, Mr. Rae and others. Witness had a lengthy talk with them in cqnliection with the matter in hand. He asked to see the minute book,and when shown it, ha copied the following extract, “ By result of ballot Mr Mayland and t>. Molesworth, Serna, were expelled from the union.” He was shown .the mifmte book by the pftsident who opened the book at the place. Witness put his finger on the minute and copied it on a loose piece of paper. The minute which he saw' occurred about half way down the right hand page o: the book. From his original letter to Mr. Parr witness read the copy made from the minute book. He read his copy aloud in “the union office and then sent it to Mr. Parr. The members cf the,, executive heard him. The president had th'e'minute book in’ front of him, but he could not swear that those present checked his copy. He was quite satisfied that he made no mistake. To S.M. The book was very like the one in front of the magistrate; the wording being similar and occurring in the same place. ■ The minute had evidently not been altered. He could not. remember the d ite ol the minute. The particular part referring to Mayland and Molesworth was all I; - wish d to s< e. To Mr. Gould: The executive gave him alt the information h wanted, and behaved in the most gentlemanly manner. .Mr. S. Dixon read the minute aloud and witness c opit-d it. He did not see Gilbert’s name on the minute. He knew that J. Gilbert had been expelled from the union. To S.M. At the requ -st of M . Parr be saw Mr Giltnour, at Ins (Gilmour’s) house, and ask - 1 whether the men w-rre expelled by letter or by verbal i- spresent it'«f to the manager, He pul tlfe" arcs question t> Mr S. Dixon and his brother. Mr S. Dixon advised him to attend the meet-1 ing, anti on repeating the question, he was shown the n inute book. Mr S. Dixon said that Molesworth sear, was not a member of the union. To Mr Gould: The book produced looked the same, and the extract occurred in the same part of lhe book. \ The words “Mr Mayland and D. Moleworth senr.” appeared in the minute. Witness did not see Gilbert’s name, else he should have copied it also. He was working up the case for the two men. To Mr Gould; It wifi be remembered that in reply to a question of Mr Evans, Mr S. Dixon stated that the minute book might be burned. To S.M. The figures given by Mr Evans in his previous evidence were substantiated oil* the oath of the witness. A. A. Stewart, secretary of the nnion until Feby. 13th., stated that the book produced was the minute book in use, and contained the minutes of all the meetings except those of the ,few held during the strike. To Vis knowledge there was onlyone minute book in existen e. The minutes of 27th. January were written by him, and were confirmed on February 2nd., before which date they had been actually written in the book. When the book was handed over to the new secretary the minutes had been written up to date. He resigned on Feby. 11th. He had not been a party to the re-writing of a special bool-: for the purposes of the present case. To Mr Gould: He could not say when the book was bought It was purchased he’ thought by the president from the Huntly Press Company. Two meeting: had not been written up. The minutes were as a general rule written up at his own home. He could not explain why the writing and the colour of the ini were so uniform. The same ink being used all the dm ■ mi d ' account for the uniformity There was no blank and In could not explain why there w u no “and” between the tw< names. He swore positively that all the minutes were written up before confirmation He took a rough note of tin transactions, and his letter . I the company w.is write, i wilh out the notes being in front n him. fie suggested Unit M Evans saw the letter which h ■ wrote to the Company, fibre ■ names, those of Mayland, Moles worth and Gilberi came befor the meeting in "al discus

! sioii. Owing to' his mistake j Moleswortli’s name Was included in. liis letter. To the best ol his belief he was instructed to inform the manager that Molesworth should not be employed. Several meetings, were not minuted. They iwere sitting as a sub-committee. S.M: They were simply sitting as a commiltee of public safety. To Mr Gould: He could not remember what instruction he received from Mr Dixon regarding Moleswqrth. He was not present and was not a member of the. executive when Mr Evans attended the meeting in question. Stewart. Dixon, President of the Union, stated that the book produced was the minute book of the meetings of the executive. The'book was the only minute ioook tlie. union had. He remembered Mr Evans coming to the office and asking to see the "minute book. The book produced was the one in the office. Before Mr Evans came to the meeting he called at the house cf witness and stated that with Mr Parr he was instituting an enquiry into the dismissal of- Mr Molesworth and Mayland. He advised Mr Evans to come to the meeting. Witness stated that he would answer any questions, and that there was a minute expelling certain men, no names being mentioned Witness picked up the book and read the minute, Mr Evans taking it down as it was read out. Mr Evans could not see the book which was closed after the extract Was read. Mr Evans did not read his notes over, but offered to Ist the executive have these if they so desired. He had at no time the minute book to copy from. To S.M.: Had he read over his copy of the minute, and tod there been a mistake, witness would -have corrected him at once. If he said that-he had not read Moleswortli’s -name Mr Evans had not stated a fact. To Mr Gould : Witness knew that Mr Evans was enquiring ■about the expulsion of Mayland and Molesworth. Mr Evans took no interest in Gilbert's case at all. Mr Evans asked why Maylaiil and Molesworth had been expelled from the union. It was at the house of witness that he made the first- enquiries about the expulsion of Molesworth and Mayland. Witness informed M:* Evans that Molesworth was not a member of the union, and gave the same answer to ;\ similar question in his former evidence. .When Giltnour said that Mayland, Senr., was not a mem - ber of the union, witness said that both father and son wore members. He could Hot explain the uniformity of the writing in the minute book, and contradicted the statement that the minutes had from their appearance been all written up at the one time. Several minutes had been signed by witness at one time. The executive met every night for a. time in order to consider applications. Ia January ’they might have sat three times a weok. He could not say who ordered the minute book. It might have been ordered by the secretary. Himight have ordered, the book, and hava takfen it to the office. Witness did not think Mr Evans had asked to see the minute book. He w uld nut have shown it. I’Uo remark that the minute hook might be burned was never made by him. At his house hetphl Mr Evans that a previous minute book had disappeared twelve months before when the office had been broken into, lie did not. suggest, even jokingly, that the minute book might disappear. Four general meetings of the union had been held, the first oaO /In ' J amtary and the last a fortnight ago'.' A resolution was pa -sed by the executive protesting against the.- conference of the arbitration union and sent to the union. To th S.M: Mr’ Evans when he called at witness' house asked if he knew who ho was. He sail, “ No.” “ Well I am the Rev. Evans, and want to know why certhin homes have been, broken up? He, came up to see why certain men could not be ad;to the union. Nothing was said about Gilbert. Mir Evans only enquired about Mayland and Moleswrrth. To Dr Bamford: The present secretary, Mr E. Mackay, was ah : -lit on account of the death of his wife. The later minutes were written by Mao Kay. After Dr Bamford and Mr Gould had addressed the Court, the Magistrate intimated that decision would bo io unwed, Dr Bamford to have, if he desired it, the right to reply to the arguments adduced by Mr Gould. District News. TAUPIRI. At a meeting of the Lower Waikato League held at Taupiri recently, it was decided to secede from the Auckland League and apply lor direct affiliation with the New Zealand League. The annual meeting of the Taupiri. branch of the Auckland Farmers’ Union was held in the Library building last week. The report of the year’s work showed 1 that good progress had been 1 made. The President, Mr A. ’ FT. H. Waring and the Secretary, Mr P. P. Bynon-Powoll, much to - the regret of the members, did not : seek re-elec ion. Mr Charles > jvas elected president and Mr - Martyn, secretary. f The carting of metal on the Taupiri-Orim Road lias now been ) suspended till the spring, s. Sportsmen report agi scar* - city of game this’season. None i of our local shots has ol el £ - big bag.