MINERS APPEAR IN COURT

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23746, 18 September 1942, Page 4

MINERS APPEAR IN COURT

“MEN ANXIOUS FOR A SETTLEMENT” HEARING ADJOURNED UNTIL THIS MORNING (P.A.) AUCKLAND, Sept. 17. Charges against 196 Pukemiro miners of being parties to a strike were heard in the Magistrate’s Court at Hamilton to-day by Mr W. H. Freeman, S.M. The charges were brought by the Labour Department under the Strike and Lock-out Emergency Regulations, 1939. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr V. R. Meredith) appeared for the department, and Mr W. J. King for the miners. Mr King asked first for an adjournment of the case until'a later date, and when this was refused he made a further request, described by him as unorthodox, that the Court should merely convict the men for whom he pleaded guilty, and call them up for sentence later. He asked this, he said, that a chance might be given for the dispute to be settled. A settlement might have some bearing on the sentence. This suggestion was discussed by both the Magistrate and Mr Meredith, and at noon the Magistrate adjourned the Court until 2 p.m. to give Mr King an opportunity of presenting to the men a proposal that they should return to work, but after a further adjournment to 3 p.m., Mr King said he regretted he could not give an assurance that the men would return to work. After a brief deliberation the Magistrate adjourned the hearing till 10 a.m. to-morrow. At the outset, Mr King explained that of the 196 charges, there were 14 that he wished taken separately. The men charged were in four classes, he said. There were those who were obviously guilty of a technical offence. Second, there were those mem who were on what was known as a backshift at the actual time of the commencement of the strike. These men had a substantial defence. The third group were men .who were at the time on workers’ compensation. The fourth group comprised boys who were 17 years and under. In two groups there was a good defence. However, all the men charged were willing to admit a technical offence. He asked as a concession that the charges against the boys in the fourth group should be withdrawn. Mr King added that it would assist the prosecution if this were done. Mr Meredith agreed immediately to this withdrawal. He said he would agree that boys of that age did not have mature judgment, and that they were likely to be swayed by others. "Not Beyond Solving” The essential matter in this unfortunate business, said Mr King, was for an opportunity to be given for the dispute to be settled. He understood that the dispute was not beyond solving. He wished it to be understood that although the men were pleading guilty to a technical offence, they did not wish it to be construed that they admitted full responsibility for the dispute. He then asked for an adjournment. Objection to another adjournment was raised by Mr Meredith. He said that a grave offence had been committed, the gravity of which in the present state of affairs confronting this Dominion and other Allied nations could not be too greatly emphasised. The Magistrate ruled that an adjournment was out of the question. The position to-day was too grave. Coal production was vital. The men were keen and anxious to get back to work, said Mr King, and to do their part in settling the dispute. However, they were members of a larger body. He could only ask, in the circumstances, that sentence should not be passed at present. The Magistrate: Do I understand that the men are immediately ready to go back to work? Mr King: I cannot go so far as that. They are members of a larger council and must take the advice of that council. The. Magistrate: Why can’t the men return to work and still have the matter settled? Why waste good time? Mr King said he merely asked that reasonable time should be allowed for a settlement of the dispute. He suggested one month. He merely asked on their behalf that the penalty be