SLAUGHTERMEN BEFORE THE COURT.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8757, 6 March 1907, Page 2

SLAUGHTERMEN BEFORE THE COURT.

Per Press Association • > " Ckbistchuech, MilVTOll 5. Ovor one hundred slaughtermen were 1 summoned to appear before the Arbitration Court to-day in connection with tlie strike at Islington and Belfast. 3 itdge | Sim presided, supported by Mr fe. Brown i and Mr K. Slater. Mr T. W. Stringer prosecuted ana j J. Uougall defended. - ; Mr Stringer outlined the course ot , events leading up to the trouble, submitted that there had undoubtedly been a strike and called evidence. Mr Dougall, in reply, said there were a great number of men summoned and no factious defence was being put forward on behalf of any one of them. As regards the general principle of the whole matter he submitted under the circumstance in which the men ' worked they ought not to be convicted .ot striking. Xhey were liable to be dismissed at a moment's notice, and they were never expected to give notice. As regards the legal aspect he submitted that the agreement of February, 1904, under which the parties were working, was unenforceable by reason of the fact that the proper formalities for its execution were not complied with. He submitted that, where an award or agreement had been entered into prior to the passing of the Act, persons subjected to that agreement could not be brought within the penal provisions of section 15 | of the Act. If his Honor decided that i an offence had been committed, and that the men should be fined, ho submitted that section 15 came within section 101 of the original Act, by which the total amount of fines that could be under any award or agreement was limited to XSOO. It these men were fined the Court must tako this into consideration, remembering that there were other cases still to come before the Court in connection with the matter now proceeding. He also emphasised the quiet- and orderly behaviour of the men, 1 who had committed no action which ' could bring them within Jbhe .penal clauses ' of the law, apart from this 'suctjon 15 of the Arbitration Court. ' His Honor intimated that the judgmfcni.of the Court would bo issued at 10 a.m. the next .day.

Judgment ; of Court.

■The Arbitration Court gave juclgmextt to.-dii.v-ra t)ie slaughtermen's strike at Belfast and Islington works and found them guilty of taking part in a strike, acting in combination, and refusing to work because the companies did not agree to their demands. Several of tlie defendant vera dismissed, but Hie charges no-,,'->«i; :i*l the others were sustained ■fid the moil anod i£s each. The Srt desired to tho hope tin* the men would consuJ.' lll! -; 11 own interests ami those . of tlie emplovers by arranging to return to work "without further delay, r rh. ; o companies otter to discuss terms vrith the Union, and to make tlie rates fiuallv settled operate as from the date of the strike was a very fair one, and apart from any questions of penal consequences the men are ilbadvised in not accepting the offer. The case against the Aslrburtoi* slaughtermen, 50 in all, was then taken, and being on all fours with the others the men were each .fined £5. The fines curry costs, which will bo spread over the whole body of men. It is probable that most of the men will pav the flues at once, ■j and failing that the Department will issue dist.fefcg- warrants, as. in tlie case of ordinary debts,