SEAMAN’S APPEAL

Grey River Argus, 18 March 1941, Page 6

SEAMAN’S APPEAL

Against Disqualification FROM UNION MEMBERSHIP [Per Press Association] WELLINGTON, March 17. If he deems it “necessary or expedient in the interests of the public safety, the effective prosecution of the war, and the maintenance of essential industries.” the AttorneyGeneral has the power, under the Public Safety Emergency Regulations, to debar persons from union membership. On February 3, the AttorneyGeneral issued a notice, under the Regulations, debarring Maurice Wall, a Wellington seaman, from membership of the Auckland, Dunedin, or Wellington Federated Seamen’s Industrial Unions of Workers from that date.

In the Arbitration Court to-day, Wall appealed against the decision. The hearing will be continued tomorrow. Mr Justice Tyndall presided. Associated with him were Messrs A. L. Monteith and W. Cecil Prime. Dr. N. A. Foden appeared for the Attorney-General. The appellant was represented by Mr R. Hardie Boys. Dr. Foden said that his first submission was that the Court, in a time of national crisis during war, on the ground of general principle, should support the administrative decisions of any Minister of State, unless an overwhelmingly clear case was made out that a decision was made in error of law or fact. Secondly, he submitted that the fact of that particular decision having been made under the War Regulations should induce the Court to adopt as its background a war psychology in that respect. His U.C. of th? Regulations provided that

) no decision should be reversedarness the Court was satisfied that acts which the decision was intended to prevent were not likely to be committed. Whether or not acts were likely to be committed in the present case would depend on the tendencies and disposition of the man; and to form an opinion of those, his past history was the only reliable guide. His fourth submission was that the appellant had proved a trouble-maker, a disturbing influence, and generally ' a disaffected person in ships in particular in which he had been. Cecil Sharpe, a master in the employ of the Union Steam Ship Company, said that, in 1926, he was chief officer of the Maheno. Wall was an able seaman in the ship during part of that period. From his knowledge of Wall, witness said he definitely would not engage him in any ship, in war-time or any other time. Witness was cross-examined by Mr Boys about Wall's discharges from the Maheno, all of which were endorsed “very good” for conduct, ability, and sobriety. Witness said that had he had the signing of the discharges, some of the endorsements would have been different. To Dr. Foden, witness said that endorsements on a' discharge were not necessarily conclusive as to conduct, ability and sobriety. In some instances, a man who played up was given a good discharge to get rid of him.