MILITARY SERVICE BOARD.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLII, Issue 1015, 7 November 1917, Page 3

MILITARY SERVICE BOARD.

| The First Wellington Military Service 'Board continued Iho hearing of appeals al flic Maffistrjitc's Court yesterday. j A SOLICITOR'S APPEAL. John Graham, barrister and solicitor, Feilding, appealed on tlio ground of undue hardship. i Archibald Biftir, solicitor, of the firm of Chapman, Skerrctt, Tripp and lllair, Wellington, said thai I"- know ihe business of jMr Graham n't Foilding-. Appellant did a large amount of conveyancing with counI try people. His chain-.' of obtaining a

suitable man wore so remote as to be almost, impossible. I nless ho were offered a partnersiiip and very attractive terms there would bo no chance ot getting a man capable of managing.

Captain Walker: Are you aware (hat Mr Graham hns a capable managing unqunlitied clerk?

I Witness: 1 I know several unqualified j clerks in Wellington who are more capable i than qualified men. ■ Captain Walker: Do you know of any .young solicitors practising on their own account who have left for the front? j Witness: The. last man to practice on his i own account in Wellington is going into : camp. Captain Walker: What did he do with ! his business'.' Witness: He had to close his doors. Captain Walker: Do you suggest that Mr Graham would have to close his busi- ' ncss if he has to go': ! Witness: On the assumption that Mr I Harper has to carry on the business, it 1 would certainly suffer. i Captain Walker: That's to be expected ' during the war. I Witness: The question is, whether ho should suffer such a loss. i Captain Walker: The question is, whether a ('2 or married man should reap the benefit. Witness: Thai's a question for the Legislature. Captain Walker: Can you give an instance where a business has been handed over and managed by another man? Witness: Wo propose to make an arrangement that when any solicitor goes into camp the other solicitors will do Ids work, the profits to go to the solicitor at the front, and they would endeavour to carrv on his business free. | Taking into consideration that appellant uiav be in camp six months and perhaps 12 months, don't yon think he would have time to clear matters up? Witness: That is so. Counsel: He may only be in camp two months Would it, not'be taking set-ions' risks with a business which has £200.000 in iriist accounts to have It l n the hands of a manager? To Mr McLaren : We hope to have the scheme of helping other solicitor, in opera-. ,;,„, hefore the Second Division is called „,, Hitherto we have only had a friendly arrangement and we need a belter organised one. , Arthur Thomas Clark, auditor, said ie had audited for Mr Graham ,m< 1914. Ihe Turnover ranged about n quarter d a mili;011 ~ vr , u -. The business required a very competent man to look alter u. on account of the involved trust accounts John Graham, solicitor, sod that he was aeed 33. and married in April, 1916. He was q'iiite willing to go into camp provided he could obtain a suitable manager, but so far j l( .' } n( | f oU nd it impossible to secure one. To Cap!. Walker: lie had not advertised for a man. because he had found out that suitable men were not obtainable. (..'apt. Walker: The ISoaro has often found it necessary to remonstrate with farmers who have not advertised for assistance. Are there not plentv of reputable men who wool.! take the position.

Witness: I understand there arc not. (.'apt. Walker: I'll put n slraigliJ question to vou. If Ihe Board sends you into camp, v. hat will von do ';' Witness: I will have Io close. What, else ran I do? To Cnpt. Walker: Harper had been with him for ten yen-:, but witness had to supervise him. Cnpt. Walker: You are a. pretty good athlete, aren't you'.' Witness: 1 have a game of tennis occasionally. ('apt. Waller: Can you give any reason why you shouldn't, go? There are hundreds who have given up everything and'gone? Witness: 1 made' it my dutv to find out from a fooruitincs sergeant early in the war whether I should go, and he considered it my dutv to stay. The appeal was dismissed, have being granted to February 13th. RELIGIOUS OBJECTORS. Eric Smith Badger, farmer.- Bulls, slated that 1)0 w.is :i dairy farmer living at Bulls, lie had one other man working on the farm, besides 'his bruthur-in-law, wlia did! Lite engineering work, appellant doing the dairywork. Witness stated that his opinion was subservient to tlie fact that he was a Christian man and against warfare. Appellant, addressing the Board, raid: "Vou know what they arc doing with religious objectors:" „ Mr McLaren: 1 know there- is an orga.ii-

' ised movemont to malign the Defence De partment. Witness: I sincerely affirm thai I havt .held these views for fourteen years. 1 would go into the ambulant.' if 1 v.as a I shirker and a toward, and if 1 shut my I eyes to divine revelations. I've consulted some of the lending authorities for mv ailment, and they can't do me any good. ! Mr Cooper: li tlio medical authorities find you no good they will turn you out of camp. It's a good chance for you. ' Tin- appeal was dismissed, leave being i granted to January loth. I Alexander Roattio Cairns, market gardI ener, Wanganui, appealed on grounds of | religious objections. | Appellant, stated ho had belonged to the Church of Chrisi all his life. Mr Cooper: Is it against Ihoir doctrine to light ? Appellant : Thoy don't preach to that effect. To tiie chairman ~.\ He was quite aware that non-combatant work was as dangerous as any other branch of the service. Tlf appeal was dismissed, leave being granted to February, with a recommendation tiiat appellant be given non-combatant work. DRIVERS' APPEAL. William Lawrence Smith and Ernest Raiusford Smith, driver:;, Ashhurst (Mr Moore), appealed on the ground of undue hardship. James Lawrence, grandfather of appellant, said that he worked for the Oroua County Council and appellants worked for him. Ft would take him to ("hri-tm;-. r< finish his present contract. Both the boy; had been ordered into camp. Me risked t1,., either one bo let oft' altogether, or that tin two b" giv< n leave to ! In is l mas 1 Tiie apnea)* were dismissed. FARMERS' U'PEALS. Richard Alfred Lubbock, urm t, R doing, appealed on the ground of undue hard-hip. Alfred William Lubbock, father of appellant, slated that, he was aged 69 and his farm ran ?C tows and 100 t-tieej). One sin was on active service.. Witness was 101 able to work himself, Richard Alfred Lubbock corroborated his father's evidence, and stai -d he looked after the milking machines and separated the milk. The ."ppoul «;:,i adjourned sine die. with suspension from military duties in the meantime. Sydney Laybourne Jackson fMr Oakley), station manage:. Levin, slated he was man aging" a station at Whirokino of 4500 acres, which he had managed for four years. Appellant was married on the Ist September. 1915. The farm carried 30C0 sheen and 300 head of cattle. )!,- had a ( 2 man. and ploughman besides himself on the faun. One hundred acr s were under crop, and appellant, supervised the shearing and did the mustering, besides doing shearing fur neighbours. He asked for exemption iiil March. The appeal was adjourned till next >it ting of the Hoard. Rrnr-sr. Ito-venport. farmer Palmerston Xortlt (Mr Oakley), said he was an agricultural farmer and single. [I. w:w rejected and pur in tins- (2. after which he purchased a farm. Appellau! had no oilier relatives in New Zealand. To (.'apt. Walk' r: He took up his farm in September, lie was the last man on the farm and expected exemption on this account.

The appeal was dismissed. t 'HIFord Stanley Hani-, fanner, Rata, appealed on the grounds, of undue hardship. Alfred Harris, father oi appellant. t=aid that he had four soin running two farm-. two on each farm. He asked for exemption for appellant, who was classed CI. and thai Lionel, who was classed A and who was the las; man on the farm, be taken instead, lie would lie n withdraw the appeal. One .-mi was already in camp'. The Hoard reserved iis decision sine die on condition that Lionel goes into tamp. PARCEL CARRIER U'PEALS.

11, iberl Kn-fi I, contractu!'. Paho.erston Xorih (Mr Oakley), stated (hat- lie was single and ajf«"'fl 22 ' Ho had a roiiirncl For delivering ol parcolf a! the Palnicrston I'.i. t Oflioc. Hi' I tat] originally been turned down as C2 anil 1.-icl rntejed into his contract l»for<> ilm .Military Servicr- A< I was pasw.l. ;i.inl on account of an aookleiii had been foriii«ilv rejected-for service in Aimiui. H" |, ;u | ilin/i brotheis in camp or. on active scr vico. Tito bi'parlmciri hold hirn ro~|mnsiTile Io the carrying mil of his rontract, and he appealed on thi- t.ecount. The appeal was adjourned till nexl sitting' in ord< r to receive a statement from the IV ''"A'WIDOWED MOTHER'S APPEAL. Kri'il t happol, mercer, Kcildiiig, stated he.was' 34 and single. Ho had a brother in partnership with him who had nor, cnli*tcd and gone to the front, and he had to carry cm tho bnsineii alone. He. also had a widowed mother; who was an invalid, and a sister dependeid on him. The Board rest-wed it* derision sine die. OTHER APPEALS. Claude Derranf Cock, contractor, Kitnbol ton (Mr Cooper), appealed for time, and was granted till February 6th. The appeal-oi Ernst Hat ve\ [lome, Halcombe, was adjourned it: order to allow appellant io be medically examined. The following appeals were dismissed, there being no appearance of appellant*:-? !•!. C. l.'uif. farm manager. Wuimariiio, and llcrberl Hoil'e. draper, h'eilding.