SEAMEN’S DISPUTE

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 217, 11 June 1935, Page 11

SEAMEN’S DISPUTE

Expulsion of Member From Union CLAIM FOR DAMAGES Cross-examination of Officials Cross-examination o£ witnesses on various aspects of the shipping dispute of July-August, 1934, continued in the Supreme Court in Wellington yesterday, the fourth day in the hearing of the case brought by Douglas Gibson, who with others was expelled from the Wellington Seamen’s Union. Gibson’s claim for an injunction overruling the union's action and for £lOO damages is being heard by the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers). As a result of an observation previously made by his Honour—that it was possible that the union’s decisions which plaintiff was alleged to have disobeyed were themselves unlawful —the general methods of union officials in the dispute were among the matters examined. The principal evidence was given by the president of the Welling ton union, F. P- Walsh. Mr. d. K. Wilson, with Mr. lan Macarthur, is appearing for plaintiff, and Mf« E. I*. Hay, with Mr, H. J. V. James, for the union. “Faked Document.” Continuing hjs evidence of the previous day of the hearing, F. P. Walsh said that during the negotiations with the shipowners they .notified the union that they were not prepared to continue in conference with it unless there was an assurance that the Maheno would sail without delay. The union succeeded in getting the ship away, and immediately afterward a further requisition wap made. Arising out of that the council felt it was not desirable to continue negotiations with the shipowners until the union aad disciplined its own members. Counsel were sent home and stop-work meetings were held in the four main ports. At these details of the. interruptions in the negotiations were made known “I suggest this is a faked document, ’■ Mr, Wilson said when Mr. Hay produced a copy of the circular rep nt on the negotiations sent to the meetings. The part be objected to as being not authentic was the third page. Witness, in reply, denied that the report was not authentic. Witness continued that he realised that a sectional strike would have been definitely against the interests of membership of his union, and, also, that there was every possibility of negotiating a settlement with the shipowners ivithout resorting to industrial warfare. • ’ Petition by Members. . The first-ifitimation he had had that the minutes of the special meeting held on August 13 were not included in the minute-book was when told.this in the present court case, Walsh said. After tho report of the council had been adopted by an overwhelming majority in the four main centres, friends of the members that were up for suspension and expulsion secured a statement signed by 102 members requesting the council’s recommendations oh this to be submitted to a plebiscite. The council felt it would be fair to give effect to the request. “Plaintiff was expelled for not following the lawful decision of the union. What was that decision'.'” Mr. Wilson asked.

It was a decision made at the meeting of the Wellington Union on August 2, witness said. Gibson had combined with others in the first place to defeat the decisions of the general executive council;.while a member of the council he carried on secret communications with Sullivan in Greymouth; and he was endeavouring to bring about a sectional strike, contrary to tho express wishes of the membership, After August 2 he joined with others to defeat the lawful decision of the union.

“Act of Real Traitor.*' It was oue of the charges against Gibson on which he was expelled that he acted contrary to the decision of the general executive council, be added. The most flagrant thing of nil was that after the meeting of August 2 he deliberately prevented vacancies being tilled jn the Kini aud the Vnrera. N'o other, charges were made against him. Witness described Gibson’s attitude as “the act of a real traitor.” Explaining his reference made previously in the hearing to IAV.W. tactics, witness said: "Many years ago nt Auckland the tramwaymen ran what is known as a legal strike. It was led by a man named King, who was a member of the I.W.W, All they did to succeed on that occasion was to run their cars in terms of the regulations. ‘Tn the mines of this country." he continued, "the miners have been successful in increasing their wages and Improving their working conditions by simply applying the mines safety regulations. Mine-owners have been forced to lock out the miners for no other cause than-acting strictly in accordance with the law of the land. Tactics For Seamen. "Our agreement would have expired on August 30. The door to negotiations with the shipowners was still open, and It was our intention to renew those negotiations. In the event of not being able to come to an agreement we proposed to take advantage of the fact that we were not working under an agreement and our members would not lie bound by one." Mr. Wilson: Did you ever hear that officers of your union were circulating fictitious rumours against Gibson?— "No.” Did you ever contradict a charge that Gibson wrecked the Australian uuion? —“No.” "It does not matter who wrecked the Australian union, or whether that union was wrecked at all, for that matter,” commented his Honour. Recalled by the Chief Justice, T. F. Anderson, secretary of the Auckland union, said that in the irritation tactics decided upon there was not Included delay In the movements of ships. To delay ships would involve penalties, and it was intended to avoid that. At the meeting in Auckland on July 26 it was true be bad said that the conference favoured the adoption of the tactics of delaying ships and similar methods. "Misleading- Members.” Cross-examined further, witness admitted that in the court on Friday he had said the joint conference did not Intend to put the irritation tactics into operation until it was certain that there was no prospect of there being negotiations.

“At the same time the meeting decided that pressure of some kind must bo immediately applied, and as a means of doing this, according ts the miniites,

the meeting favoured the adoption of irritation tactics,” his Honour intervened. “How do you explain the word ’immediately' that occurs two or three times in that passage?” "■When I used the word ‘immediately’ in that statement I was to some extent misleading members of the union for tactical reasons,” witness replied. His Honour: You were telling them that something was intended which you now say was not intended?—"Yes, your Honour, it amounts to that.” Evidence that he had approached without success about 80 men in one day in an endeavour to fill a vacancy on the Kini, was given by Felix Newfield. secretary of the New Zealand Federated Seamen's Union and of the Wellington union. "Underhand” Methods. His Honour: You were oue of the four men who expelled Gibson from the union. Now, what did you expel him for? Witness: When he was on the general council be received communications from the West Coast and he never told his mates. He was working to divide the membership of the union; when there were attempts to get an agreement with the shipowners be didn’t help the majority but the minority. Because he didn’t agree with some of the officials lie wanted to break up the union at the expense of the seamen. He went in an underhand way to break down the decision of the majority. This decision, which was made by the four main centres, was that the seamen could bang on until things improved and then get the wagecuts restored. “This is a case, it seems to me, that will be decided one way or the other present I don’t know which way J on fairly broad Issues,” his Honour commented, before calling the adjournment until to-day.