THIRTY CHARGED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 109, 11 May 1933, Page 8

THIRTY CHARGED.

TROUBLE WITH CREW.

ALLEGED DISOBEDIENCE.

ALTERCATION ON MAHIA. (By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, this day. When the Shaw, Savill and Albion Company's cargo steamer Maliia was six or seven days off the New Zealand coast an altercation took place between the boatswain and an ordinary seaman named Winters. Blows were struck, tho men were separated, and within five minutes Winters went over the rail and committed suicide. When the vessel arrived at the first New Zealand port, New Plymouth, a thorough investigation was made, and the conclusion arrived at was that tho boatswain was in 110 way responsible for Winters' death. No charge was brought or could be brought against him. This statement was made to-day by counsel for the company, Mr. H. i". O'Learv, when 30 members of the crew appeared before Mr. E. Page, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday afternoon. Seven were charged with continual wilful disobedience of lawful commands, two with wilful disobedience of lawful commands, and 21 with being absent from their ship without leave. Mr. F. W. Onglcy appeared for the accused. Those charged with disobedience of lawful commands entered pleas of not guilty. The first man charged, George Armstrong, stated that he refused to take the ship to sea with the boatswain, but that he would do so otherwise. Men Object to. Boatswain. Mr. O'Leary, who said the cliargcs were made against the men under section 225 of the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act, 1594, also stated that the police had also been informed of th.? circumstances of Winters' death, and it was held that no action could bo taken. Since leaving New Plymouth the crew had decided they would not work the vessel unless the boatswain was _ removed. The vessel arrived at Wellington last Friday, and on Monday a deputation waited on the captain with a view to having the boatswain removed. The captain, however, refused the crew's request. He gave them permission to go ashore and obtain any advice they desired. Subsequently seven seamen had refused to do work at the request of the boatswain. When it was decided to take tltf ship out into the stream seven seamen and a number of firemen left the ship. * Captain Andrews, master of the Maliia, in the course of evidence, said he felt that the boatswain was condemned unjustly. He thought that Winters suffered from mental weakness.

In reply to Mr. Ongley, Captain j Andrews said he had the right to transfer the boatswain to another vessel, but was averse to this as he had been with him on five deep-sea trips and he had found him satisfactory. One of the accused, Harry Cecil Elby, able seaman, when cross-examined, said lie had no complaint to make about the captain. Mr. Ongley said he had nothing to say on the merits of the case. The accuscd wore apparently an honest body of men who had conceived the idea that the boatswain had goaded Winters to his death. They said they would prefer imprisonment and subsequent deportation rather than sail with him. The magistrate said he would think the matter over and give his decision in the morning. Owners' Terms Refused. The members of the Mahia's crew this morning refused to accept the owners' terms. When the Court case concluded tho owners offered to pay off or to transfer the boatswain. The men stated they were willing to return to the ship on condition that tho master guai-anteed that they would not be given "black" discharges when they reached London. This guarantee was refused by the company. Counsel for the company said that after yesterday's Court proceedings the boatswain told tho captain that in view of what had happened, he did not wish to sail, and was willing to be transferred or paid off. Tho magistrate said that the men evidently considered the boatswain might have contributed to Winter's suicide. Tliis matter was now under inquiry by tho police. Winter liad previously attempted suicide, but the attempt was not connected with this boatswain. The charges of disobedience had been proved, ho said, but he had given the men an opportunity to return to the ship. The Court was adjourned for consultation, after which the crew's counsel raised the question of clean discharges. The company's counsel said guarantees could not be given. After some discussion all the crew refused to return to the ship. Seven of the men guilty of wilful disobedience were sentenced to I seven days' imprisonment. The others I were ordered to forfeit two days' pay | for absence without leave.