REFUSAL TO SAIL

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 109, 11 May 1933, Page 12

REFUSAL TO SAIL

THE MAHIA'S CREW

OFFER NOT ACCEPTED

NEW- DEMAND MADE

Notwithstanding an offer to pay off or transfer the boatswain with whom they refused to sail, the thirty-one members of the crew of the s.s. Mahia charged at the Magistrate's Court with offences under the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act, refused this mo.rning to accept the terms of the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company, the owners of the vessel. The men stated in Court that they were willing to return to the ship on condition that the master of: the vessel guaranteed that they would not be given "black" discharges when they returned to London. Mr. H. F. O'Leary, who appeared for the company, said that such a guarantee could not possibly be given. When the case against the crew was continued this morning Mr. O'Leary said that after the Court adjourned yesterday afternoon the captain returned to his ship and was approached by the boatswain. Subsequently the boatswain handed him a written statement in which he said that in view of what had transpired he did not wish to sail with the vessel. He was willing to be transferred to another ship or, if necessary, to be paid off. Although the captain could refuse to take that course, he was willing, if the men would return to the ship, to accept tho boatswain's resignation. FURTHER INQUIRIES. • "I have no doubt," said Mr. Page, "that you men considered that the boatswain was unjust to Winter (a seaman who committed suicide), and may have* contributed to the man's suicide. Whether he did in fact contribute to it is a matter as to which further inquiry is, by tho direction of the Minister of Justice, ■• now being made by the police here. "It appears that Winter at • some earlier date and quite unconnected with this boatswain attempted suicide, and it is shown that earlier on this voyage when his back got bad ho spoke of giving up his work or else going overboard. "It is clear that the present ehargos of wilful disobedience and absence without leave have been established, but in the circumstances and in view of the fact that further inquiry is being made I propose before imposing a penalty to give you an opportunity of returning to your ship." The Court then adjourned while Mr. F. W. Ongley conferred with the accused, whom ho represented, as to whether they would accept the Magistrate's offer. "BLACK BOOK" FEARED. After the conference Mr. Ongley said that the crew still refused to return to the ship. The whole trouble was that the members of tho crew feared that when they returned to London they would get a "black book." There seemed no way of avoiding that. Mr. Page: There Would be no advantage in having the matter delayed further1? Mr. Ongley: I fear not, your Worship. Two members of the crew of the i vessel expressed their views on behalf of the others. The first, MeMillan, said that many had wives and families to support in England and if they were given "blacky discharges in London their previous good records would not be taken into consideration' and they would be unable to get employment on any ships in theßritish Isles. It would practically mean the end of their seafaring careers. Another member of the crew named McNulty expressed similar views. He added/further, that if they worked the ship homeland got "black, discharges there was quite a possibility that they would be liable for gaol again in London. "NO. BARGAINING" Mr. O'Leary said that the matter had already been discussed and the captain had told the members of the crew that there could be no bargaining in respect of thejr discharges. Such a course would be contrary to the, terms of the Merchant Shipping Act. The ship had already been held up for two days at very considerable expense, ana when the vessel returned to England the captain would have.to explain to the owners what had occurred. He would look ridiculous if he gave the men good discharges.. Mr. O'Leary said that he regretted that, such a guarantee as proposed by the crew was impossible. Keferring to the suggestion of the men that there1 was a possibility,of further prosecution' when they returned Home Mr.' Page said that this could not und would not happen. No ono could bo brought up twice , and put in peril for the same offence. The circumstances of the present case would be reported by the captain when the vessel returned to England, and then, no doubt, proper- consideration, would be given to the question of the discharges. In his opinion the men stood a better chance if: they, went back to their ship and did their duty.. If they did not, the only thing left to hini.wa3 to impose penalties for broaches of the regulations. ~ ■ In answer to the Magistrate all the accused refused to return to the ship. Seven men, guilty of wilful disobedience to the orders of the master, were sentenced to seven d.ays' imprisonment. The Magistrate ordered that the others should 'forfeit two days' pay each on charges of being absent from tho ship without leave.