MAKURA APPLE CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume L, Issue 265, 7 November 1919, Page 6

MAKURA APPLE CASE.

EVIDENCE FOB DEFENCE. HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND QUARANTINE. . , The Supreme Court was occupied again yesterday afternoon and to-day with the action .brought by W. H. Grove and Sone, Ltd., fruit merchants, againet the Union Steamship Company, Ltd., claiming £933 net as damages for the over-carriage of 1000 cases of Canadian apples to Sydney by the Makura in December last, during the epidemic. The case is being heard by Mr Justice Cooper and a jury of twelve. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., and Dr. H. D. Bamford are for the plaintills, and Sir John Findlay.K.C, and Mr. K. McVcagh for the defence. The questions of law in the case, which is one of a series of similar claims against the defendant company, are to be argued before the Court of Appeal. Alexander B. J. Irvine, local manager for the Union S.S. Co., cross-examined by Dr. Bamford, eaid that it wae true that on December 1 he received a telegram from his head office to the effect that as th c Makura would undoubtedly be detained in' quarantine at Sydney, it was desirable that she should discharge only passengers and mails at Auckland, carrying her New Zealand cargo on. Two (lays later, however, he was instructed to have the cargo discharged. The overcarriage of cargo meant a heavy loss, probably about £6000, in freight. The detention of the vessel at Auckland ako meant a heavy Dr. Valintine Chief Health Officer, arrived from Wellington at 1 p.m. on December 6, and the same afternoon witness sent a telegram to Dunedin stating that Dr. Valintine authorised the discharging of apples into the Kokiri. At C p.m. the same day, Dr. Frengley told him unofficially that the Makura would probably have to leave for Sydney without 'discharging her cargo. The next morning he received a telephone message from the Health Department to the same effect, and was informed by Captain E. Stott, the company's local marine superintendent, that Dr. Valintine had told him that he wished the Makura to proceed to sea. He took this as confirmatory, and wired Dunedin that the Auckland "cargo would have to be disregarded. Evidence was given by Captain C. B. .Daniel, seamen's inspector at Auckland , for the Marine Department, and by Captain Stott. The latter stated that on December 7 Dr. Valentine met him and showed surprise and annoyance on t hearing that the Makura had "not left. I He said that the vessel should have been - away at daylight. Both witnesses dei clared that the waterside workers absolutely refused to work the Makura 5 unless ehe were declared a clean ship, i They maintained this attitude until after f jshe had sailed. The evidence of the master of the • -Makura, taken on commission, was read. ! WATERSIDERS' ATTITUDE. ■ Charles Weaver, president of the Aucki land Waterside Workers' Union at the time ot the Makura's arrival, stated that special arrangements were made for , working cargo on the Niagara and Talune, but influenza had made such progress by the time the Makura. was due that the union decided not to work the Makura or any vessel unless she had . been .declared a clean ship, and had , berthed at the wharf. Subsequently representatives of the union held a" conference with Drs. Valintine and Frengiejv.tlie chairman -of the Harbour Board and the Mayor regarding the Makura's! apples. The doctors made a number or suggestions about fumigation, but the union would not abandon its resolve. > either the Union Company v> nor the fruit importers offered the union any epecial indemnity or other inducement to work the ship, but he was certain that had they done so it would have been useless. Eight members of the union who agreed to help coal the Makura were ■ met with a very hostile demonstration by the rest, and for ten daye or so were boycotted as a health precaution. He was sure that the union would have strongly objected to the employment of free labour to unload the fruit." Harry Hillier, secretary of the union, gave corroborative evidence. Captain John Adamson, marine surveyor, gave it as his. opinion that if the Makura's apples were stowed in the manner d«scribed to him, it would have' been impracticable to remove the 160 tons of superincumbent cargo and place it temporarily on deck while the apples were removed. There wjjs not sufficient deck space available, and furthermore the ship's stability would have been endangered. The came •opinion was expressed 'by George Edmund Fox, master stevedore. Thomas F. Anderson, secretary (of the Auckland branch of the Seamen's Union, said that members of the union would undoubtedly have refused to work cargo hod they been asked to do so after the watersiders had refused. His union passed a resolution endorsing the «tand taken by the Mayor and the Citizens' ■Committee in affirmingthat the Makura ought not to be worked or berthed until she wae declared clean. n rt , \ Ge , <^! eS i !ra!,am Russ «". who was port health officer at Auckland last December, said that he found about half a do Z e n casee o f j nfluenza aboard thfi - Ur? * f nd ? rdered her "*<> quarantine indefinitely. It would have been dangerous to those on the ship and ashore if discharge of cargo in the ordinary way had been permitted, because of the virulence of the disease in Auckland. There was aleo a danger in the other direction. As port health officer he allowed no communication between the ship and the city except such as wus necessary for the welfare of the people aboard. r £ Regarding the Makura's departure, the witness said that the captain asked him to authorise the vessel to leave. Dγ Yalint'ine concurred, and (he jrave a certificate, in which he used the word I authorise." The case is proceeding