NON-MOBILIZED MAN

Dominion, Volume 38, Issue 21, 19 October 1944, Page 6

NON-MOBILIZED MAN

Direction To Industry Held Valid

ON LEAVE WITHOUT PAY

Evidence to establish the status of men who have been called by gazette into the armed forces, medically examined, but not mobilized, was given iu the Magistrates’ Court, Lower Hutt, yesterday, in connexion with the legality of manpower direction of such men into industry. At the previous hearing of an information against a man of failing to comply with a direction, evidence had been given by the district manpower officer that such men were considered by the National Service Department to fall within the definition used iu the relevant regulations as “on leave from the forces without pay.” Robert Britton Glen Chadwick, a ser-geant-major attached to the AdjutantGeneral’s office, stated that the man in | question had been called to. the forces , in the seventeenth ballot, gazetted on | September 15, 1942./ By regulation 17 of j the National Service Emergency Regu- I lations, 1940, he automatically became a . member of the forces the following day, by being transferred from the reserve to the army. He was not required to perform any military service, but was called for medical examination. He would receive pay for that day. Not being mobilized, he would be attached to the “area pool,” constituted by regulation, in his district. Cross-examined by Mr. E. It. Rothwell, who appeared for defendant, witness said he bad ascertained, by telephonic communication with Area 1 (Auckland), that defendant had been a member of the area pooh So far as the army was concerned the man was on leave without pay. There were no regulations covering that, to witness’s knowledge. If the man was apprehended by the Provost Corps, he would not be liable to arrest because, he had no pass if he explained the position. There was a special certificate, to which he was entitled, stating that he was on leave without pay. This was issuable under an army instruction, To Mr. W. R. Birks, prosecuting, witness said the instruction directed that the certificates should be issued to all men in the area pools. Mr. Rothwell said he would submit that the information should be dismissed on the grounds that it had not been established that defendant was on leave without pay from the forces. He had not been issued with the certificate as directed. The witness had not been able to quote any authority for the granting of leave without pay. , „ , . Mr. Birks submitted that defendant was a member of the armed forces and had been placed on leave without pay pursuant to the army instruction, The magistrate, Mr. Dobbie, ruled that the evidence which had been produced established that defendant came within the manpower regulations.