CLAIM BY SEAMAN

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 16, 18 July 1936, Page 10

CLAIM BY SEAMAN

UNION OFFICIALS SUED

CASE FOR DEFENCE

The hearing of an action for £600 for alleged libel brought by Douglas Gibson against Fintan Patrick Walsh and. Felix Newfield was continued in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. The plaintiff is a member of the Seamen's Union, and the defendants are officials of the union.'

Mr. Justice Blair was on the Bench. Mr. L. R. Wilson and Mr. Lan Macarthur appeared for the plaintiff,, and Mr. E. P. Hay for the defendants.

The defendant Walsh continued his evidence.

Mr. Hay: Was any discrimination shown against Gibson in the way the minutes : of the union were recorded? —No, sir. The word "nefarious" was used at the meeting, whereas the word "other" appears in the minutes. It is alleged against you.in connection with the letter sent by an official of the union to Auckland that; you knew it would be read at the union meeting there. Did you examine the Auckland minutes, following the holding of the meeting?— Yes. Was there any record in the minutes of the letter having b.een read?— No. In what way was Gibson regarded by the executive?—Gibson was recognised by the organisation as the leader of a minority who, in the opinion of the executive, were out to undermine the authority of the executive. CASE OF THE WAIPAHI. Since the events of last year has there been any persecution of Gibson as far as you, or any other official, is concerned?— Only on one occasion was the. question of Gibson's' employment discussed. Only once was I called;in in reference to it, and that was in the case of the Waipahi, in December last. The Waipahi was picking up a crew in Wellington, including plaintiff. The whole crew,'including, o.f course,'Gibson, came over to the union office, with Newfield. They came into the inner rooms. Newfield informed me ' that Gibson had been picked to go on the steamer as one of the crew, and a dispute arose. I addressed the men in the presence of Gibson, and explained that he was a. member, of -the union and was entitled to be a member of the crew. , An argument took place between some.of the men and myself as to whether, the officials had any jurisdiction. Alter a long argument in which no headway was made, they asked me to go out and leave them to themselves, .pointing out.that in other cases it was the custom to do so. I left the room with the secretary and Gibson. About ten minutes later, the men left the office without, intimating to me what decision they had arrived at.- Gibson went along with them. ..

It was decided that the crew should decide whether or not they would sail with a man they objected to?— Yes.

If Gibson asked you to assist • him" to get employment, what . would be your attitude?—l would do my. best for him.

In regard to the charge that Gibson had wrecked the Australian union, do you believe in the truth of the charge?—l understand that Gibson had told the men on the Waimarino that he had been responsible for the handing out'of: 100 union books to persons who were not.members of the'AustraI liah Seamen's Union. I also learned I that he had been elected president of the Australian Seamen's Union unopposed; but his departure from Australia, and the statement he made in connection with the. tactics .he employed over there, made me think that there was a certain amount of justification for what I had heard. The fact that he was,, an executive officer, in Australia, and left there as he did, I' thought called for an,explanation. ■ Mr, Wilson: You were in close touch with the Australian union before Gibson came to New Zealand?—We have been in close touch' with the organisation there^ """' -". ' Men arriving on Australian steamers call at your office practically every week?— Yes. ■ • They bring the gossip from the Australian union?— They bring reports from Australia.- ' ' Did you cable to Jacob Johnson in Australia, about, some of, the seamen coming from there?— Not in respect to Gibson. . GOOD CREDENTIALS. | Did you make any inquiries as to] Gibson's clearance and' credential , papers before he was admitted to the union?— Yes;' the assistant' secretary, Mr. Wall, told me that Gibson had good credentials from Jacob Johnson. Were you satisfied in 1934 that Gibson had taken part in the wrecking of the Australian union?—l heard that he had taken part in it. I heard of such a statement being made at Auckland. ' r.

Witness added that the statement read by his counsel on the previous day was genuine. He (witness) did not believe the statement which had been made that Gibson had nefarious ways of getting a living,.but believed he was entitled and not unfair in recording it in the minutes. As to the Greymouth incident, in the light of further evidence, he thought the charge against Gibson was minimised tea great extent. If he had heard before -what he had since heard in Court-he would have had an open mind about Gibson

hearing was adjourned .till to-