THE WAITEMATA TROUBLE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXX, Issue 15180, 18 December 1909, Page 10

THE WAITEMATA TROUBLE.

«? THE DISCHARGED SEAMEN. \ CASE BEFORE THE SUPREME '. '* : . ■.-. COURT. f||| At the Supremo Court yesterday, Mr ';;;Justice Sim heard the case of David iLindsay Maxwell, able seaman, v. tho [Union, Steam Ship Company, a claim for '£2s for- wages. Mr Stringer, K.C., jwith him Mr Johnston, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Beswick for tho defendant company. In opening the case,'Mr Stringer said that it was a claim for wrongful dismissal. -Only a co:mparatively~smali sum was. involved, but the case affected ;the rights of a considerable number of men, and also raised question's of imiiportanco with regard to the construc!tion of certain articles of agreement, 'and the award under which seamen l-were working. A statement of facts lhad be-on agreed upon. The plaintiff sVnd other _ seamen shipped on the Waitemata, signing on at Lyt•jtelton on what was known as a run-, fining agreement. The articles set outli.that the plaintiff shipped " on a voyage ijit'rom Lyttelton, to any port or ports in gj&he Australasian colonies, or island or' jflislands in tho North or South Pacific' HiOcean, trading to and fro in any sue-' fjjeession of voyages for a term of serjivice not exceeding six calendar months, j for until first arrival at the port of Lyti|jtolton after expiry of that term." The [Waitemata commenced her voyage, and' lySfter calling at several ports arrived in 'ipunedin, sailing thence to Newcastle. jTho plaintiff signed on in May, and ijr*he steamer arrived in Newcastle on September 18. On September 20 the of the ship terminated' tho plaintiff's engagement by giving twenty-four hours' notice, but the plaintiff and' !«'others who were similarly treated objected. On September 23 the plaintiff and others were ordered off the ship, ,„flnd they accordingly left. The com»i\«pany afterwards provided them with _tfree passages to New Zealand. The Articles contained the following clause: X*je-" The New Zealand Arbitration Court JXawards in respect to seamen for the 4tK imo in force shall be to form part of this - ■agreement wherever they apply." ti It was intonded that the Waitemata go from Newcastle to Manila, K* which was an island in the North Pacific, and within the limits of lae articles. At Newcastle the men-were practically turned off the ship." The ijppntbntidn for tho company was that Pit. had a right to determine the contract at any port, even outside New p'ealand, while the contention of the r&en was that their engagement must |fee determined in. New Zealand. The Howard practically adopted the view [taken by the mon, and counsel submitted that the only possible construction of sub-sections F and G in Clauses '43, of the Shipping and Seamen Act was [that they contemplated the contracts ':t>eing determined in a New Zealand fiport. It seemed impossible to suprpose that it was contemplated by the jßarties that a man could be discharged •in Manila, where he might be left for Apme time unemployed before get;iing back to New Zealand, i Mr Beswick submitted that tho ser,yico could l><> determined at any time .on the completion of a voyage, by giving the. necessary notice. There was p! limit beyond which they need not go. lit was open to the company to tormi•,'nate the engagement at any AusItralian port, provided a freo return was given to !>icv.' Zealand. The contract did not imply a round trip, and tho hmen need not necessarily bo discharged lip New Zealand. The award showed ptihat it was contemplated that the men '■«*iuld be discharged- at places outside "the dominion, by providing that if the ('discharge took place in the dominion |lhe men should be returned to their (port by rail if tho employers so desired. There was practically no difference in the case of tho men coming l-ibank in the Waitemata, or in another iWreamer. They were getting their ijjfreo voyage when they came back in 'Another steamer. Bft'Mr Stringer: They get no wages. H Mr Beswick: They are not working, =«nd that is one of the risks they run. < \' : Mr Stringer said that Mr BeswicK •kad ignored the fact that the men (Bight bo discharged on any one of the in the North Pacific. The men

might earn a month's wagos and then take two months to get back. The men might also leave the ship at ono of these islands, and cause it to bo laid up there indefinitely. • His Honor reserved his decision.