EVIDENCE OF HARDSHIP

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 16499, 27 March 1917, Page 4

EVIDENCE OF HARDSHIP

CERTIFICATE SUFFICIENT. CANTERBURY BOARD'S VIEW. \ [bt telegraph.— association.] ~'. BLENHEIM. Monday. Ax' appeal by Father ■ Patrick'. Fay was before the Canterbury ( Military Service Board to-day. ' Copies of newspapers were produced containing reports of Archbishop O'Shea's appeal in respect of the same priest in Wellington, -where the case ■was adjourned sine die,' with the condition that the case should be reheard before the Second Division was called.: ':, ..-.. The" chairman,; Mr. J.. S. Evans, S.M., gave an important decision regarding certificates issued by a Minister. He said it was a mistake to have a personal appeal heard before one , board ! and the archbishop's appeal before another.; There was no Minister's certificate-attached to this appeal. Ho regretted the board could not follow entirely the decision of' the Wellington board. It considered an appeal board could not put any condition on the Minister's certificate, \ unless the evidence justified the board' over-riding the certificate. ;'.«' "--•'.;.

The certificate was prima facie and sufficient evidence of hardship, the chairman continued, and' became conclusive evidence of hardship, unless evidence to the contrary was adduced before the board. The duty of producing such evidence, if it existed, lay on the military authorities. If no such evidence was produced the" certificate was sufficient' evidence of 'hardship and effect should be given to it with qualification. As a certificate had' been issued in respect of this priest this board would act on it, as no evidence' to the contrary had been brought before the board. The appeal would be adjourned sine die. without the condition imposed by tho Wellington board.