THE NEW STRIKE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXX, Issue 3537, 30 May 1912, Page 5

THE NEW STRIKE.

FRUIT IMPORTERS ANXIOUS.

DEPUTATION TO THE HOME SECRETARY.

THE CAUSE OF THE TROUBLE.

[UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION COPYRIGHT]

(Received May 29, 10.20' p.m.) LONDON, May 29

Tlie fruit importers waited as a private deputation on Mr Reginald McKenna (Home Secretary) asking what protection he would give if they would provide men to discharge the cargoes. Mr McKenna said that tlier© was plenty police protection, but no free labor. A meat imi>orter offering £1 per day had only secured two hundred workers. They could not give military protection or allow the military to unload the vessels.

He asked Mr F. W. Moore ivhy the Argyllshire, Osterley, and other vessels were not transferred to another port. Mr Moore explained that the owners declined, fearing that the strike would spread and added that if the strike continued for a fortnight or three weeks the arriving soft fruit would be spoilt. Mr McKenna was sympathetic and said he hoped that an agreement would he arrived ati shortly. Sir Edward Clarlfe found that the Thomas case was based on a misapprehension rnd said that this was very exceptional. The case should be brought under clause 5- The August agreement was being discussed by representatives of the masters and men .and in the event of a disagreement it would be arbitrated by the Board of Trade. The same rule applied to the alleged breach of‘ the August 23 agreement between the “Short Sea” traders and the National Transport Federation. The master lightermen peremptory refused to discuss the Amalgamated Watermen’s and Lightermen’s increase, and this was one of the important causes in the present disputes. Moreover sailing barge owners failed to explain their refusal to pay the rates agreed upon on January 1. Similarly the wharfingers were to be blamed for not accepting the case governing all the oversea ships under Lord divers tone’s ruling of November 27, enforcing under given conditions Mr Rollit’s award for a higher rate of August 5. The refusal of Mr Bissell, a master-carman, to pay the rates agreed upon had created much difficulty in view of the statutable obligations on the Port of London authority, but beyond asking the Port authority to decline to load his vans the Federation was quiescent until the other disputes arose, finally concerning vexatious interference with trades’ unionists. Sir Edward Clarke mentions the non-compliance of the Workers’ Federation with the rule concerning the conference and the appeal to the Board of Trade.