MASS MEETING ON SATURDAY.

Northern Advocate, 17 November 1913, Page 5

MASS MEETING ON SATURDAY.

HIKURANGI MINERS

AMENDMENT REFUSED,

A mass meeting convened by the Hikurangi Miners' Union was held at the top of Cameron Street on Saturday night. There were about 200 persons present. The following resolution was proposed by Mr Bishop, and seconded by Mr Munro: 'That this meeting of Hikurangi and Whangarei Miners' Unions protest against the brutal action of the Government in arresting the leaders of the Federation of Labour and not allowing bail, with a view to breaking up the strike, and also condemns the action of the Government for assisting employers to force a body of men into the wishes which are contrary to the laws of this country."

In proposing the resolution Mr James Bishop spoke of the arrest of the leaders as unjust, and referred to the case of Larkin, arrested at Dublin, but which proved a fiasco, as the Government were compelled to release him. If the members of Parliament had the courage of their opinions they would pass legislation and settle the trouble in a few days. He was not a professional agitator, but objected to the employers trying to force a body of men to join Arbitration Unions. He also reviewed the Huntly strike. In this victimisation of the employees was the cause.

Mr Munro, who seconded the proposition, impressed on the meeting that he was a member of an Arbitration Union. He spoke of the imprisonment of W. T. Young and condemned the action of the magistrates in refusing bail. If the men who were imprisoned were committed for trial in the Supreme Court and bail refused they would have to Btay in gaol for three months and be deprived of opportunity of preparing defence. Cries of " Hurrah.'' " They are dangerous persons." "The Government wants to take care of them." As an Arbitrationist he was against strikes, but the action of the employers in trying to force the formation of Arbitration Unions was only a move to break the Federation Unions. The farmers were making a serious mistake when they took the employers' side. He exhorted those present' to believe only half of what they read in the papers and to be very doubtful about the other half.

Mr McKinley referred to the atcion of the Northern Coal Company in closing their mine at Kiripaka, which he could not condemn too strongly. He said the men had acceded to a request from the Federation of Labour to take a day off and attend a mass meeting to discuss the Waihi strike. The men did so, and the Northern Coal Company immediately closed the mine. He regretted to say that one of his old comrades had gone to the directors after and begged of them to give him work so as to help his wife, who was seriously ill, and died in the hospital a month ago. At Hikurangi the miners were arguing amongst themselves as to the merits of Arbitration and Federation. He, personally, did not know whether he was an Arbitrationist or a Federationist. A week before the strike started the Miners' Union agreed to register under the Arbitration Act, and an agreement was entered into with the managers of the Northern Coal Company. This agreement was sent to Auckland to be signed by the directors of the company. It was sent back unsigned. At Huntly as soon/as a man was elected to the Executive Committee of the Miners' Union he had to get out.

Mr Tattley, manager of the Northern Coal Company's new mine at Hikurangi, asked why the Huntly men did not submit their case to the Conciliation Commissioner, or they had the alternative of taking a secret ballot. He then endeavoured to move an amendment.

Mr Bishop then said that the setting up of the committee as previously suggested was the only reasonable course, but this the employers refused to accept.

Mr Tattley then endeavoured to remove a misapprehension, but was interrupted by Mr Bishop. "We don't want to have a discussion here. If you want to have it out, we can take the hall in Hikurangi."

Mr Tattley: I only wished to correct a misapprehension.

Mr Courtayne said he thought the workers did not thoroughly understand the Huntly question. If, as the men allege, victimisation was practised, they had the remedy in their own hands. The agreement under which they worked provided for fines of £50 per day if the miners struck, and £100 per day if the employers caused a lockout. The downing of tools was a pernicious system. The men should have cited the employers before the court. He upheld the action of the farmers in providing free labour and thus preventing endless loss and misery through inability to procure stores.

Mr Bishop briefly replied, and then put the motion to the meeting. Very few votes were recorded for or against the motion, and it appeared to be about even. The motion" was, however, declared "Carried by an overwhelming majority. 4