WATERSIDE PAYSHEETS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17794, 30 May 1921, Page 5

WATERSIDE PAYSHEETS.

TIMEKEEPERS IN COURT.

ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD. WELLINGTON PROSECUTION. A case of considerabls interest to those connected with shipping and the -waterfront came before Mr. ¥. K. Hunt, S.M., in the Wellington Magistrate's Court on Friday, when Alexander Joseph Chishokn and George Churchill were charged with having between September 7, 1320 and Februijy 23. 1921, conspired with certain persons unknown to deiraud the Union Steam Ship Company oi £165 6s 10d. Chief-Detective Ward represented the police, Mr. A. B. Sievwright appealed for Uhishoim, and Mr. H. F. o'i.eary for ChurchilL

The chief detective said Churchill had been employed as head timekeeper by the Union titeam Ship Company, and was responsible to Captain Walton, local marine superinLendenl. His duties were to engage all labour for working coal, to record in a bcok Qie names of tne men engaged, and to compile the slips supplied to the Employment Association by nim. Chisholm was assistant timekeeper to Churchill. He did nut engage labour, but his duties were to obtain irom. the foreman in charge of the gangs working on vessels tho names of the men and the times worked by each ; to check the names on the list of labour engaged by Churchill.

Books Alleged to be Missing. The time-sheets showed that a man named Wells had been continuously employed on coal lumping from September 7, 1920, to February 23, 1921, also that a man named Walker had been continuously employed from November fi, 1920, to February 23, 1921. During the periods mentioned Wells and Walker were eh own to have drawn £165 6s lOd, and receipt* for this sum were held by the Employer;' Association. Wells and Walker would state that the signatures on the receipts were not theirs, and further that neither of them had worked for the Union Company since May 4, 1920, but that they had been continuously employed by the Harbour Board since that date. ChurcniU and Chisholm's books could not be found, and only three books of the foremen could be found. These three books showed that neither Wells nor Walker had worked on the boats mentioned in the time slips for the month of February. The time slips were in the handwritings of Churchill and Chisholm. The Employers' Association paid the men, and the wages due were made up from the time slips.

Compiling the Paysheets. Captain B. S. Walton, local marine superintendent for the Uni*>n Company, said he had charge of all the company's cargo and coal operations in Wellington. Churchill had been for about 20 Years in the employ of the company, andlhe other man for about four years. In February there was a stoppage of work on the wharf, and the time was utilised to check the books. The cargo book of the preceding week was overhauled, and a few days later the coal books were wanted for examination. The books Were kept in the office occupied by the two accused. Witness called for Churchill's labour engagement books and the coal foreman's labour book. He succeeded in getting about three of the foreman's books and an explanation from Churchill that he never kept his own books after he had finished with them. Each vessel handling coal was in charge of a labour foreman, to whom the men, as they were engaged by Churchill, were passed over. The time the men worked was recorded by the labour foremen in books which were returned to the timekeeper. The iimekeeper_ would depend upon the foreman's book* for the time worked by the men. Witness got no books from Churchill and Chisholm kept no books. .

A Bonnus not Claimed. Edward Cyril Smyth, accountant to the Waterside Labour Employers' Association, said his duties were to receive from the shipping companies lists of the times ■worked by the different men, and from these he computed the wages to be paid the individual workers. Among the lists received were those from the Union Company made up from the figures of the two accused. So far as the records of the office were concerned Wells and Walker ceased to work for the Union Company after February 23. There was a dispute between the employers andr the watersiders in February with respect.to wages and bonus. A bonus was granted c the men, and it was made retrospective. The Chief Detective: Were Wells and Walker entitled to the retrospective- bonus up to February 23, —Witness: Yes. The bonus was there for them. • • -

Did either of the men call for the bonus ?—No.

To Mr. O'Leary: They had a card for each worker, and they had handled from 1500 to 1600 cards a week. They had a certain amount of difficulty owing to the similarity of the names of some of the men working on the wharf. The worker furnishes his name and initials* and he was paid To Mr. Sievwright: Neither of the accused drew money from the office, and had they presented themselves at any one of the pay-windows they would have been recognised- Churchill and Chisholm had engaged as many as ©30 men a day.

Wells and Walker Give Evidence. * Thomas A. Wells said he had been working for the Union Company up to May 4, 1920. He joined the Harbour Board staff on that date, and had been continuously employed on it since. When working in the coal gang for the Union Company, he had been engaged by Churchill. There was another man of the same name as witness, but he did not know his initials. Churchill knew" witness was working.for the Harbour Board, for on one occasion wftness told him so. v Witness repudiated the signatures on the pay-sheets, and said that none of them was his. He had not authorised any one to sign his name. Edwin Norman Walker said ha was a casual worker for the Harbour Board, and had worked as such since May of last year. Prior to that month he worked in the coal gang for the Union Company, and he was usually engaged for this work by the accused Churchill. He did not know of any other E. N. Walker working on the waterfront. The" signatures on the receipts produced were not his, and he had not authorised any one to sign his name to them. _

James George Bruce, secretary of the Waterside Workers' Union, said that Edwin Norman Walker was a member of the union. He did not know of any member of the union with the same name and initials. Thomas A. Wells was also a member of the union, and there was only one T. A. Wells. To Mr. O'Leary: The membership of the union at present was over 2300. There were about twelve or fourteen men named Walker on the list, and about four or five named Wells. The members of the unio?i received a ticket and badge each, so that they might be known on the wharf. The further hearing of. the charges was adjourned until to-day.