APPEAL FOR EXEMPTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17091, 24 August 1917, Page 7

APPEAL FOR EXEMPTION

CLAIM BY FARM MANAGER, (From Oub Special Refobter.) GORE, August 23. At the sitting of the Otago No. 2 Military Service Board to-day Morgan Williams (farm manager, Kelso) was p.ppealed for by the Perpetual Trustees and Agency Company, Dunedin. Mr Payne, who appeared in support, said tho case was originally heard at Clinton, and was adjourned sino die. The appellant was managing' a large property for Lieut. A. S. Herbert, who enlisted in tho ea'iy stages of tho war. This ' was not the case of a rich man appealing, as Williams was quite willing to go. It was a case of a rich man going to tho war and leaving a poor man in charge. Lieut. Herbert, who was a Territorial officer, was at present serving with the forces in France, and had been wounded. Lieut. Herbert's brother-in-law (Colonel Stewart) was killed in the war. Tho wives of both these men were serving in the war too. ' When Mr Herbert enlisted ho had no idea that Williams would bo taken away, otherwise he would probably havo reconsidered his position. It would bo a very serious thing for Lieut. Herbert if Williams had to go to camp. He maintained tliat this was an exceptional case, a whole family having gone to tho front—a record which it would be hard to equal in New Zeaiand. He thought tho case should again be adjourned sine die. Captain Bitrrett said the Herbert family record was one to be proud of. He failed to see, however, where there was any hardship. The only hardship was a military one. Tho case did not appeal to liim as one which required special consideration. Tho man himself had no claims, and as a matter of fact did not appeal. J. A. Park (manager of the Perpetual Trustees, Estate, and Agency Company) said Lieut. Herbert's property was being managed by tho Perpetual Trustees Co. Witness could not• work i the property himself. The property, with stock and equipment, was worth between £30,000 and £40,000. Lieut. Herbert enlisted very early in the war, and had given Williams a power of attorney. It would be a serious matter for Lieut. Herbert if Williams 'were taken away, and this contingency could not be anticipated when Lieut. Herbert enlisted. Mixed farming was being carried on, which made tho position more difficult. Witness had thought out the matter from every point of view, and he considered that it was absolutely essential that Williams should stay. 1

The Chairman said Williams was drawn in the ballot in February, and his appeal was heard in March. He asked witness what had been done in tho interval to replaco Williams.

Witness: The inference I drew from tho decision of the board was that Williams would not require , to go. The Chairman: Oh no.

Mr Payne said he had probably misled ■Mr Park on . this point. The case was different from some others, in which the appellants were told to be prepared to go before the Second Division was called up. Mr Breen asked Mr Park if he. did not think it reasonable that Williams should go before the Second Division. Mr Park said Lieut. Herbert certainly thought _that his family had done its full share. Tie thought Williams would be left at all events until Lieut. Herbert would have been called up in the ordinary course of events. The Chairman said the board was ot opinion that Williams must go into camp, but it was prepared to allow him until the Thirty-sixth Reinforcements, which would assemble on November 10. Mr Payne said Mr Park would like to have Williams's services until the shearing in December. Captain Barrett:' Ancl then till after the harvest in February.—(Laughter.) Mr Orbell: Lieut. Herbert's brother can help with the shearing. Hie Chairman said the board was not prepared to alter its decision.