THE COLLETT CASE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 298, 13 June 1912, Page 5

THE COLLETT CASE

UNION SECRETARY PINED £2O. By Telegraph—Press Association. Auckland, Wednesday. •Judgment was given yesterday at "the Magistrate's Court in the case brought by the Labor Department against James Collett' (secretary of tne Waterside Workers' Union) for £2OO penalty for aiding and abetting a strike on November 22, in respect to unloading cargo on the Paparoa. Mr. Selwyn Mays appeared for the Inspector of Awards, and Mr. R. F. Way represented the defendant. Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., reviewed the leading points of the case, and said he had already held there had been a strike owing to combined abstention of the men in order to influence conditions of their employment. When the case was brought against the union the Arbitration Court had also held there had been a strike. Mr. Collett (secretary of the Auckland Waterside Workers' Union) was now charged with having aided and abetted a strike. The action was under Section 6 of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act of 1008, which provided that every "person" who "incites, instigates, aids or abets" an unlawful strike should be liable to a penalty of £2OO. Mr. Kettle quoted the case of the Queen v. Coney to show that "mere presence" did not constitute "aiding and abetting," but that something must be done by gesture or conduct to show that in some wav the persons "encouraged" what had taken place. Applying that principle to the present case, Mr. Kettle said he was of opinion that it was overwhelmingly established that Mr. Collett did aid and abet these men in their strike. Mr. Way had contended that Collett, as a waterside worker, was only liable to a penalty of £lO, but his own opinion was that Collett was liable for the maximum of £2OO, as he had been acting as secretary for some time, and was not holding himself for hire as a worker on the wharf. Fortunately for Collett the strike was of short duration, as. Messrs. Nearing and Co. (when the pistol was held to their head) agreed to the terms demanded. A penalty of £2O would be imposed. Costs would be allowed. Mr. Way gave formal notice of appeal. Mr. Kettle: "I hope you will take it to the Arbitration Court, and I 6hall be pleased to give you every facility for doing so."