A CHURCH SUED

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 139, 9 December 1935, Page 11

A CHURCH SUED

SPIRITUALIST CASE

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

MEDIUM'S ENGAGEMENT

Further evidence in the case in which Ethel May Craigie, a medium, is suing the Spiritualist1 Church of New Zealand, and three of its officfers for alleged breach of contract is being heard by the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers) in the Supremo Court today. The plaintiff bases her claim for £300 damages on the allegation that the defendants wrongfully terminated an engagement she had with them to act as a speaker and medium of the church. She also alleges that the defendants wrongfully cancelled her speaker's licence and her permit to act as a medium. The plaintiff is also seeking declarations.that the termination of her engagement is of no effect, and that the licence and permit issued to her are still in full force, and an injunction against any interierence with her status and privileges. Mr. A. B. Sievwright, with him Mr. K. E. Tripe, appears for the plaintiff, Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell for the defendant church, and Mr. H. J. V. James for .the three other defendants, Samuel E. Williams, Ernest C. G.vay, and Alfred Henry Heather, president, secretary, and treasurer respectively of the church.

"Charles Henry Jones, a telegraphist, and a member of the Wellington branch of the church, said that at a meeting of the church on Sunday, May 5, the president of the church, Williams, told Mrs. Craigie he had much pleasure in presenting her with the certificates, which he felt with confidence would enable her to carry out her. duties. Those duties were to speak from the church's platform and take the meetings as a medium should do and give private readings. He also told Mrs. Craigie she was. employed by the national executive of the church until March 31, 1936. There were about sixty- present at the meeting. » '

Mr. Treadwell (cross-examining): You don't know that three days before the meeting Mrs. Bowen, the secretary of the Wellington branch, had already offered her a job, setting out the terms of remuneration?— No.

Or that she had accepted it before this meeting?— No.

His Honour: Neither of them called it a job.

Mr. Treadwell: But it was really. His Honour: I think it is referred to as an engagement.

This concluded the case for the plaintiff. Mr. Treadwell then proceeded to call evidence for the defence. PRESIDENT GIVES EVIDENCE. The defendant Williams said he had presented two.licences to Mrs. Craigie in May. Referring to the evidence given, by Jones, witness said he disagreed with his reference to a contract or engagement with the national body Mr. Treadwell: Did you make any reference to her engagement with the .thatSccasfon? °r any °ther body °"

Witness: That is difficult for me to say. I have not quite so good a memory as Mr. Jones, but I certainly did not refer to any engagement with the national,executive. I might have made ?u me,,? c£ erence t0 an engagement with the Wellington branch. Witness said that the national exe.cutive of the church had never en-tered-into an arrangement, -with a rnedrum ■ since 1924. The branch churches made their own financial arrangements with mediums h^^ S% fai-? th *at^ e did not remember the details of the conversation he had had with plaintiff before the mee"tl nh *? n May 5- but he denied having told her that she was "to be employed by the national executive. Mr. Treadwell then asked witness if ne could say anything about the arrangements that had allegedly been . made with the police. "There were no arrangements wht'h ever, replied witness, "other than that we supply the names of those whom we have licensed, and also the names of those from whom we have with- . drawn the licence." " WITHDRAWAL OF LICENCES. •nl^nt?^ in?- t0 meeting at. Which ■Pontiff's licence and permit were withdrawn, witness said that three members,of the national executive were present. He had communicated • witn the other members of the executive, with the exception of Mrs. Bowen Mrs. Jones, and a Mr. Baird. He had not communicated with Mrs. Jones or Mr. Baird because he did not know where they were.

His Honour: Do you mean to tell me that, first of all, your executive gave, a person means of obtaining a livelihood, and then 'took it away at a meeting convened without notice to one or more of: the members of your executive?

Witness: Yes, sir. . His Honour: It is a strange thing to do, isn't it? \ Why did you not communicate with Mrs. Bowen?

Witness: Mrs. Bowen did not enjoy the confidence of the executive. That meeting was held some considerable time after Mrs. Bowen was appointed a member of the executive.

His Honour: It does not matter; the fact is. that that is what you have done. -

Mr. Treadwell:. Will your Honour allow him to elaborate? He may have a little more information.

Witness: I had in my possession a letter written by Mrs. Bowen which was.-vilifying Mrs. Craigie to the last degree, and I did not consider it was safe to trust Mrs. Bowen with any information at all..

.-. His Honour: That is very astonishing.

Mr. Treadwell to witness: Were you in touch with the other members of the executive? Were they, advised of the meeting? •■•

Witness: Yes, the other members were advised - with the exception of Mrs. Jones and Mr. Baird—l did not know where they were.

Mr. Treadwell: Did those whom you got in touch with communicate with you ■in any form?— Yes, sir, they communicated by letter.

His Honour to witness: ■Is there any rule which permits votes to be recorded otherwise than by persons personally present?— Yes, sir. RESOLUTION INVALID. Mr. Treadwell then proceeded ta examine the witness on the minuting .•; the resolution cancelling the plain"ift's licence and permit.

ills Honour: There can't be any question but this so-called resolution cancelling ibis certificate is absolutelj' invalid.

Mr. Treadwell: I am not going to sug. gest to your Honour anything else.

His Honour to witness: Can you explain how your national executive could cancel or determine an engagement to which it was not a party?— None of the executive officers are pro. perly qualified to act as secretaries and. such like. All the officers are honorary ones and we just do the work to the best of our ability in cur spare time.

Percy Mcß. Anderson, an ex-secre-tary of the church, and treasurer of the Wellington branch, denied that ha had told plaintiff that she was to be engaged by the national executive. Witness said, he was present at the meet-