Mr Champion on the Corinna Case.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 6329, 24 September 1890, Page 3

Mr Champion on the Corinna Case.

The following is from Mr Champion’s manifesto in the Age : What I am driving at is just this— that the ' fair men on both sides are agreed upon the fun* damental propositions set out above. All their trouble is. about' their application to the instances which the employers’ side quote. Well, let us take them one by one and ex* . amine them in a spirit of fairness. It has got to be done sooner or later, and the sooner it is done the fewer employers will die their petitions, and the fewer babies cry for hunger. That is what, it means, you know, and if yon can keep any drop of black malice in your ■ heart while you remember that, you are made of the wrong etuff. I have seen them cry- : ing for hunger more than once, and I don’t mean to see that going on again if anything ! can do can prevent it. But 1 would rather see even that than aak either of you to do anything an honourable man need be ashamed of.

How, let us take the “ Oorinns ’’ case, as it is called. Her commander, Captain Sharpe, -dismisses a man.: -The owners, naturally, enough, back up the captain’s action ; but the - Seamen’s Union, 'of which the man dismissed : is a spokesman, alleges that be was dismissed .unjustly—i.o., for his connection with the Union really, and not for incompetence or other just reason. The Union, naturally, back up their man in the only way open to them. They demand an inquiry into the circumstances, and, failing this, their members will not sign articles in any vessel under Captain Sharpen Now, I say the point- at ‘issue is entirely one of fact, and can only be settled by the ordinary rules of evidence. ■ What-was the - real reason of the man’s dismissal ? If inoompetency or drunkenness or Tazinen-or anything, of that kind, I- and every trade unionist in the world says Captain Sharpe was right to . dismiss him and the owners right to back up their captain. If the real reason was that the man was spokesman to the Union, then I say every fair em-

ployer must see that trade unionism cannot exist for three months if the unions put up a to voice their complaint and, when he is dismissed for doing so, abandon him to his fate without a struggle. For clearly, if that is to be done, no man can afford to act as spokesman for his fellows. We don’t advance a bit by hearing that shipowners declare the captain had good cause and the unions say he had not- I refuse to believe • either side, and you can't settle it until the facts are sifted by a jury of honest men' who have heard the evidence. u. ,

The side which refuses or delays such an inquiry lays itself open to the taunt that it must have something to canceal. But, say the owners, if I understand thom,“ We have got something else to do than to hold courts of inquiry into neve,vending complaints.” Quite true ; but it seems to me you have got few things more pressing than to clear your ' reputation of-the slur that you say in public that you are friends of trade unionism, and yet shirk an enquiry into this case, in which the whole trade unionist principle is involved..

Come, gentlemem you - are convinced your captain acted fainy. ■ You have everything to gain by establishing the fact that you have not been'misinformed, and if you establish it yon wont be troubled with any more inquiries for many a long day. You must see that. I suggest you declare that if the seamen will go back into the boat commanded by Captain Sharpe pending the inquiry you will allow the enquiry to take place. What do you say ?