SHGMATISED A SCAB."

NZ Truth, Issue 471, 27 June 1914, Page 7

SHGMATISED A SCAB."

' * — " -■• Jl *'fl STUART DIXON'S DEMAN| TORlHft DOLLARS fl THE HUNTLY PRESIDENT APPEALS TO A HAMILTON M * "Maoriland Worker" Tocicfted U| to the June of a^lfc l ; "I \ \ (From "Truth's" Hamitton Reporter*) I

The indiscriminate use of the strike epithet, "scab" m its application, to the individual must be proving a very, expensive hobby to the Red-Fed, organ, "The Maoriland Worker," because on Friday of last week, at Hamilton, the newspaper. in question was tickled to the tune of a "thou," without taking into consideration the accumulation of costs, for making some very unpleasant observations concerning ; ONE STUART DDCON, who at present occupies the position of President o# the Arbitration Union of Miners at Huntly, a union formed since the Huntly "Feds."' went out on strike. The particular libel of which Dixon complained appeared m the issue of the "Maoriland Worker" of December 10, 1913, and was published under the heading of "Huntly Notes," and read as follows; Dixon, the scab organiser, who • is still m the employ of the Taupiri Company, was sent to Auckland to try and get scabs for tho mines. After spending three days there he returned with one scab, but he, after being here a couple of days, left tho town without going to work. Dixon then made another journey to Auckland, but again failed m his endeavors, returning this time alone. The Company m the meantime) had a notice In the newspapers, also m various shop, windows, asking men to apply for work, so that the mines could be started on tho 4th. They stated that no fresh men need apply. They did not like to tell the public what we already knew: that they along with a. willing tool, m the guise of a man, had tried to got scabs to take our work; but the move had been an absolute failure. • \ According to tho statement of tho claim, Dixon set forth that the defendant newspaper intended to convey that ho (Dixon) WAS A TRAITOR to the causo of the workers, and was a dishonorable person to bo held In contempt and hatred by the workers ! of New Zealand. Consequently, ho ! had been greatly injured m his credit and reputation. / The statement of the defence denied that the words wero intended to convoy that Dixon was a traitor, etc., etc., and further denied that he' at tho time of the occurrence, or at any other time, was a miner resident at Huntly. Publication was admitted. The case was heard before Mr. Justice Edwards and a jury of twelve. Sir. J. R. Reed, K.C., and Mr. Nowton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. " Donnelly and Mr. P. J. O'Regan championed the defence. Learned Lawyer Reod, m opening tho case for the plaintiff, outlined tho history of tho striko at Huntly, and BY A SIDE-WIND got m to tho jury tho fact that on a former occasion, at Auckland, m tho Walsh case, the "Wprker" had been hit up for .damages for stigmatising the plaintiff m that case "a scab." Lawyer Donnelly, however, objected, wheroupon Mr. Justlco Edwards gavo Mr. Reed, K.Q. tho ''chat," not to mention the damnseu rewarded. Learnedly and fluently the K.C. gave every possible 'definition of a scab, and hold it to bo synonymous with "spy. "deserter," "Informer," "a mean fellow," "a lousy, skulking, scurvy, lubberly fellow." Furthermore, to make his meaning plainer to tho "Backbone" of a Hamilton jury. Counsel quoted from the "Worker" Itself, wherein It was declared that when God had finished the rattlesnake, tho toad and the vamplro, ho had Homo awful HUbstancQ left, with which ho made a scab. Also, where other people had a hwurt, the scab carried a tumor of rotten principles. Also, Judaa waa a gentleman compared with a scabhe had enough character to hang himself, and a scab had not. In concluding Ills uddroKß, Counsel obsorvod that In any town In Now Zealand where tho Federation of Labor had any sway, Dixon could not count on earning a crust. Evidence wait then called. Joseph Young, assistant Inspector of old workings » at Huntly. waa tho first wit nous. He had worked at Ralph*- mine, Huntly, and remembered THREE BTRIKI3B LAST YEAR. Dixon and witne«« did not «o out at tho tlmo of tho hint find sympathetic Hirlke. The miners wvro divided on tho point, and a number, including witness favored arbitration. Witness took tho nrtlclw In question to refer to tho plaintiff. There was no other man named Dixon at tho Huntly mine at the tlmo of tho publication, though Hlncu Dlxon'a brother, Joe, had worked m tho mine. Anyhow, Joo \vn« not a prominent person. At the Umo of tho publication plaintiff Nyos In Auckland, and wlinctw and a man named Stewart look ii copy to Auckland. Ah a result of tho publication witness and plaintiff woro Hubjoeied to n lot of abuno m Huntly, nnd In Auckland thoy had been followed by hoatlle crowdrt. Tho police had boon «ont to Huntly to pro» tcci them, but tho police protection afforded wnu not Mullleieni. CtmUnutnK. ho «ald ho hud not noon Dixon, the plaintiff, at work. Wtnuttui'K work (ha (\U\ not oil) himself a miner), took him nwny from tho min^ra. Ht« hfttl «ccn plaintiff at the top of the shaft. An? you now a member of the Huntly Minors' Union? — No. What i« Dixon?— H*. l« brawman at the top of the Hhafi.. ' Mr. Rood X.C: Thl« wltne«w I* not entitled to be » member of the Hunfly Miner*' Union. Mr. Donnelly: Who pay« you?— !»ts company. You say Dixon m president of tho |ton?^~-Y«M*. mint* h« fvor it president <■>( a union mhrp<\ or four hundred m«*n h«-f«r« R article ttppwircd?--\>». I have [ UU'ii h<» wtt#. Witr» th«* Ifunily lUrlln* In [MI'ATHV WITH TUB WKLLINO- | TON HTKIKK? w<sll. will you a wear that the

Hiinfiy: strike did not occur thrfee «b \ four^jays before the strike •m WelU * iugtotf?— No. y;^ Then what was the strike in ' sympathy with?— The Federation ot'Xa* bor, I suppose. Anyhow, I am UQihaud , at dates. " " *v ■-' ""' Did all go out on strike?— No,,thertJ were six or seven arbitrationlsts left. Was nbt the cause of the strllce dua to the Tauptri Company dismissing fourteen men of the old union ?-i-That might have been so, but theyt werg ■ worktagf.uQsefran'aiysrd//': ■-, '; You kgptf they were dismissed?-! ■ Yes. i^> •£■ . -■> And ha^e .you the slightest abjubt m your mindtttiat the cause of the strike :'■■ was the dismissal of theso nibn?— l have no dogbt about it. >.' The witn^s&jtvent on to saY that he did not-Tkm^ Walsh petipnally, only by reputl While m Auckland, ' he said noUijnf^ to Dixon about taking nren backj.^ Huntly to wok tha mines. Whii^Jjj Auckland a] crowd shouted out "da;SjSfed scabs." and "scab organiser." Th^f&rowd was small aq the police brokß^p big crowds. Did you complain to the police?— » No. ■■ ' ■>;■ ; ■ . .; His Honor: Ant^Jf he did, ;• the po« lico would need to have been a ; t3trong| V force to arrest everybody who /. / USED THE WORD "SCA&" V In thoso days. ; ' -.' Tho witness furtlieiv mentioned tha| i some of the Huntly Strikers^Vrero thei%£ ( m Auckland. ," ~ "■*'*'■ /,^ ' :.. -f '"" The witness also said tij^iV he nad^ been m a number of thejif - had "Ozzlcd." v^iV^f ' : -1 s*f - Counsel: The strike. W tie work^ ing mon? ;' -^ ; . ; .u '■■'/... .'. This remark then led his' HomorJUf > observe: Aro wo not all working mop.? • ■ Mr. Donnelly: Wo are;^rind I ;.&]» not think there aro manyN^ieh v?ho ;* work with their hands aajjar^'asr do with my hands, with a peri and in# brains. ■ js; ■, Continuing, Young said jne waariwt ') suro whether he showed tl^b artlcl<l,t6 plalntilT. In Aucklaud thoy Wefe : room-mates. Tho reason both ho and "'} Dixon wero m Auckland together 'waa '"'' that apart from business of a /pri-* V; vato character, they had |Tii">nijjiggpva „ j nected with tho Huntly^J^a^if^jQSna When Dixon formed*£jh'e mow unloW aj number of mon who had atruek did nol \ v go back to work. ]. : Albert Alotfandor SteWart, a tap.*' chlneman, of tho Taupirl? mine stild -htt was vice-president of t lie new union. Formerly ho had been secrotury. TaM witness gave evidence of tho effect of the publication. I Cross- examined by limy or DonJi ' "*" nelly, ho said that Dbcon was elected] ~ president of the union on Decombefc « 6, tho llfat mooting of the unfym, ? | Dixon was still president. * ' | And I suppose ho is making as muOtli* | mouoy as ever?— Perhaps. I dos*s d know. . \ j Re-examined, the witness said th&4 ] ho bolloved thut there were - , [ SOME "FEDS" IN THE MINERS'" UNION. ' John James Clout, a'; mine official^ who is not 11 member i>f tho union, ! stated that Dixon was employed und6i* \ him as bracomnn, Btncti the previous) * week Dixon had assisted him at oth'e* -> ■ work, ~J ' " ■ j Various extraotn from tho "Maor^i 'j land Worker" giving;, various doling I tions of "scab" were put m and CounX I sol, without having called the plain* I tiff, olosed his case. ' „ Lawyer Donnelly, having intimate^ < Umt he hnd no evidence lv oJtor, $Ir. j Reed, K.C., addressed tho jUry at *t length, submitting ' that it was novf I merely a tiuestlon of- how much thft J plaintiff was entitled to, and vydujod » up by appealing tor heavy damages. Lawyer Donnelly m lUa addroaa to tho FarmerM 1 Jury, pointed out thai jdamngos woro being linked for which „' would not Dtxon up ns a, man of in* ]' dependent inoniiH. He cj£prcsA6<Ji u»-< >• toniHhment tiial months hud alnpacd !| before a writ had been ( issued^, and / ttlao thai the ciusc tor the ploduUft I had been closed without Dbcon going I Into tho' witness box. Who coujtt en- \ f I lighten tho Court on the nuturo of fl the damage mistnined? Nobody ? could -M enlighten them better than the ifle/cn^ -■ dunt. After giving , ' :^" ■ WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY I * ing ■■' ■%' m of "scttb," viz., "A worlariau who work 4 "■ for lower wngew tljan, i 'or: ; \indor con-t fl dltlona contrary to Ofose pr^cribo<| fl by v tmUo unlon.y (k[»o,, 'Ofio wbd H took the place of ]m lionoHt mrlker.'* <'jfl Mr. Donnolly contondo<i t)jnl tb'p roean-< fl ing of the "Maorllaiul \Vork«ry»" »rU<«^^B cle Uttotl hi with tho mcnnltfff giveM^H tho word "Hcab 1 ' by Webster^l C^ener^^fl nlly, lu> mainuinod thut Diiton haij^^H not been injured ah<l wah not caUtto^^H tv dunuigi't*. „.' j: I^^| Mr. Juutlco E<UvarJti surntyieu u^^^| nK';iln«i tho newspaper, niut thp Jnnj^W| after a roUronvm of, cto.»o^ on fott^ ffa hourn, found for plaintiff, ri.m! by -jL fe*j thr«»«-f«>tjrih« major!!)? nwjinioti T>\xv^.' } W" £1000. $V -V' -f . Jmlgmcn't for ClmO tind 'costs WO^ '/ acconliiigiy onterodf* ' J IJvldantly, Dixon \x out ''after hbtj thoumiiidf uh m«wit e«mo Ifrom WrUWf on Tuosdny l,'i*»t tbnt t!i<v surcoawful plaintiff had got tin injunction at|# wan In pi»u«?fl»li)n of tho old Waiftl 1 Union Hnll, ih*s nccne of ro(>oy actiift- I Uvk during the >V'nlhl strike. Thim iti wild to be n >*u)unblo property and Dixon npjHinMitly intends*-. to jrH Id* ' mone> fJ » worth. ' i I Mr. S. titover,. of U)« rMaoriJWHf fti Worker," ttnyn h«j" doe* no^^t^Ufl Jj information i« corrt^t, t^^H^^^^^fl hnl! wnn not m nny of ih<! I'edunitlon n^lni^^H^^^^^H Dixon had propc«<tc>d. Union at Wnibl. to W *^^^^^^^^H with £50 dumnnt-w, It "^^^^|^^^fl bo returned. A tfitnitar viiiw ik hcld^^^^H^H^^H Auckland rci>. and by U^H^^^^^^^l Qut<fn,CHr. Wt)O l|r l^^^H^|^^H| t h«< hull nl Wnihi I:l^^^^^H^^^|H property of ih« <;i^^H^^^^^H^^^^| nr of the J-Y(kntU<>t! |^^^^^^^HH^^H "ix>v<t l# lik^ Ktlt" fd^^^^^^^^^^M writer U\ v r^ofiit >>oV^^H|^^^^^|^^| thf> lover no oft«'tt Hftdi^^^^^^^^^^H^^l