EMPLOYING AN UNROLLED RESERVIST.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 February 1918, Page 2

EMPLOYING AN UNROLLED RESERVIST.

CASES AT AWAKINO Ferdinand Wolfe was charged at the New Plymouth Magistrate'* Conn yesterday before Mr. A. Crooko, S.M., on the information of the police, with, between July lit and August 23, 1017, at Awakino, employing a man named. Adol' phus Hugh -Parsons who. was not register? oil in the division of the .Reserve to which he belonged. Sub-lnspuctor ll\it\ ton prosecuted. Mr. J. H. Quilliam, who appeared for defendant, said that it would be admits led that the m.ui Parsons had been employed by defendant, and that he was not enrolled, but it would be claimed that that did not constitute an offence, because defendant had reasonable ground j for believing that the reservist had enrolled. Moreover it was not an offence unless a reservist was employed for a period of more than seven days. The facts were that defendant kept a board-ing-house at Awakino. On July-10 In?t t 1 "- reservist came to defendant's place and a-deed for board and lodging. lie stayed one night and paid for tea, bed and breakfast. He then told .defendant that he had no more money, and asked for credit for board and lodging until he got work. He got no work, and asked defendant, if he could give him work to do, and out of his good nature he gave Parsons some work chopping wood. j'sons looked as though he was quite; "down and out.'' He also looked as | though he might be over military age. He asked Parsons what his position was, and he eaid lie had just served a term of imprisonment at New Plymouth for failure to enrol. He asked "arsons what his position with regard to Inilitary service was, and he said it-.wrfs all-right and that the authorities had-his papers, He then employed him as stated. Mr Quilliam submitted that ' such evidence was sufficient grounds for defendant believing the reservist was enrolled. He did. not think 'it necessary that in every case an employer ..shdttld be required actually to see'an'employee's enrolment certificate. There was n further, consideration -that the day afterdefendant employed Parsons Constable McGregor visited defendant; "and a'sfced if there were any strangers about. Defendant told him about Parsons, and related all that Parsons had 'told, him, Constable McGregor made no ; comirient or warning as to the employment of Parsons. 'Parsons had been paid the ordinary rate of wages and given his keep; I Mr. Quilliam submitted that- until the time of Constable McGregors' visit no (offence had been committed, as Parsons had not been employed for a. period of seven days, and that he was therefore entitled to have.the case, dismissed. : Defendant gave evidence in -accord with, counsel's, statement. To Sub-Tn.spector: He saw no enrolment form of the reservist's; He admitted now that'seeing the man had been in gaol he should have heen more careful in employing him, ...Ho did ask Parsons for his papers,.but was-told the authorities had them.. He did not think it necessary that ho should aeiually see the reservist's enrolment certificate. He told Constable McGregor exacllv.what Parsons told him, and thought that he had safeguarded himself by doing ; that. Sub-Jnspetor Hutton submitted that the onus was on defendant and employers to ascertain/and satisfy thmeselves that their employees were properly .enrolled under the Military Service Act, and it was evident in the present case that defendant had not taken all the precautious lie should havo done. The Magistrate said the fact that the defendant bad not concealed his employment of Parsons and that he had not taken advantage of the reservist and employed him in preference to men who were properly enrolled, was in his favor. He thought that employers,, however, should \i very careful in taking men on to work without making sure of their position regarding military service. In dismissing the case his Worship said, the decision was not to be taken as a precedent, j Frederick Carrfygton was also charged with a similar offence in respect to the same reservist, whom, it was alleged, he employed at Awakino between August 27 and December 22, 1917. Mr. Quilliam represented the defendant, who did not appear. He said defendant resented the proceedings vevy much, as he had lost one son at the War, had one still fighting, and another had returned wounded. Defendant had gone to Wolfe, and asked if he knew where he could get a man to do some wood-cut-ting and Wolfe told him of Parsons, at the same time <clling him nil the particulars that Parsons had given when he came to Wolfe for work, Sub-Inspector Hutton said : a statement had been made to Constable McGregor by defendant which was signed, and which Mr. Quilliam said he was prepared to admit. The statement was that he employed Parsons to cut wood and paid him IPs prr cord. He did not ask Parsons anything about his'position regarding military service. He did not ■ now at that time that it was an offence 'to employ an unregistered reservist. Considering what his sons had done in the war, he did no desire to encourage other men not to do their duty. A further letter had been received by the sub-in-spector on Wednesday night in which defendant said he was too busy to attend the court.** The Magistrate said he. did not likn to consider the case without the defendant being present to say whether Wolfe told liim about the reservist, and that the statement made to Constable McGregor was correct. Mr. Quilliam said he had admitted the statement in order to savo expense in the matter. He could call Wolfe, however, to show that he bad told Carrington all the facts lie knew about (Parsons. Ferdinand Wolfe gave evidence as to telling Carrington what Parsons had said about his position previous to coming to Awakino. By agreement an adjournment was granjed until March 7 to give defendant a chancq to appear.