RUNHOLDERS SUED

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19802, 18 May 1934, Page 7

RUNHOLDERS SUED

SHEARING OF WET SHEEP MAGISTRATE RESERVES DECISION The hearing of the case in which a shearer, Edward Reiher, sued George Murray and Bruce Murray, two Mackenzie Country runholders, for £ls/12/damages for wrongful dismissal through refusal to shear wet sheep, was concluded in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Mr C. R. Orr-Walker, S.M.. who presided, reserved his decision. Mr A. D. Mcßae appeared for Reiher and Mr H. D. Acland (Christchurch) for defendants. When the Court resumed yesterday morning, further corroborative evidence was given by Gerald Nolan, who said that he had carried on shearing the wet sheep after the others had been dismissed. He shore wet sheep all Tuesday afternoon and on Wednesday. On Wednesday he discovered that a rash had developed on one of his legs. He considered that was caused by shearing wet sheep, and showed it to Murray. Doyle also showed a rash on his legs, but Murray made no remarks. Cross-examined, witness said that he did not think the rash could be caused by anything but wet sheep. Sometimes, when the sheep were damp with sweat, the shearers got what was known as “yolk boils,’’ but the rash he developed was not due to that. Ernest Slowe, shearers’ representative in the gang, also stated that the sheep were wet. In his opinion, the sheep in the Mackenzie Country were always wet. He considered that the sheep which they shore the previous week were wet, as were the sheep on Monday. The Magistrate: If these sheep, which you say were wet, had been kept in the shed from Saturday night till Tuesday, would they have been dry enough to shear?—l don’t want to answer that. I am non-committal on the point. The Magistrate: You can’t answer or you won’t? I want an answer and if you don’t give it I will be forced to discredit all your evidence as an expert. You are also going to leave your own crowd in a hole. Witness did not answer the question. The Magistrate: You find the question difficult to answer, because you are trying to save your men. Expert Evidence. Thomas Carrodus, wool-classer of 48 years' experience in New Zealand and Australia, expressed the opinion that after sheep had been wet they should not be shorn until after two days good drying in a stiff breeze and good sun. The shearing of wet sheep had different effects on shearers, not affecting some, while others suffered in their eyesight and from boils. To Mr Acland, witness said there was a difference between sheep wet with rain and sheep which were sweating after being dogged. had known shearers to refuse to shear sheep which were sweating.

Richard Ralph Beauchamp, sheep farmer, of Tekapo, said he was engaged at the wool table in the shed at Braemar. Witness was not in charge of the filling of the shed, but he knew that some of the sheep which had been in the shed on Sunday had been put out on Monday. On Tuesday, the first intimation he had that anything was wrong was when Gillett stopped shearing. Then Slowe, the men’s representative, told him that it was too hot to shear and that they were going to stop. When they knocked off witness went to Slowe, who then said that the men considered the sheep wet in the heat. Witness saw Mr Murray and told him that the men had knocked off because it was too hot to shear. Mr Murray told him to ring up the neighbouring stations to find out if they were shearing, and to take the temperature. The temperature was 81 degrees in the shade. The other stations treated the matter rather humorously and said they were certainly going on with the shearing. Heat Caused Stoppage. Cross-examined by Mr Mcßae, witness admitted that it was rather extraordinary for such experienced shearers as Doyle and Slowe to stop shearing because it was too hot. He had never known shearers to stop on account of the heat. There was no possibility of his having misunderstood Slowe’s remarks about the heat. If there had been any mention of wet sheep he would have told the men to wait on the board until he got Mr Murray. It was a damp heat and was one of the hottest days one got in that country. To the Magistrate: He could not say whether or not he had ever got wet through shearing sheep which were wet, but not with rain. George Murray, owner of Braemar, gave evidence of having engaged the men. The terms were 18/- a 100, with a bonus of 7/- a 100 if they stayed till the end of the shed and made a good job. Witness quoted his diary to show that there had been no rain since November 22, until Saturday night, December 9. About 1100 sheep had been put in the shed on Saturday night and packed tight. About 5.30 on Monday morning he put about 800 of the sheep out into a paddock adjoining the shed. Some of them were brought back in cuts of about 200 at a time. The tally for the day was 615 and was the biggest tally of merino wethers ever done in one day at Braemar. Slowe, who was a very fast shearer, had shorn 119 wethers in the day. On Tuesday morning witness put a cut of what was left of the sheep which had been turned out on Monday back into the shed. When bringing in another cut at about 9 o’clock, 50 wethers broke away, and, as he had only a huntaway dog with him, he had some difficulty in getting them in. Sheep Chased About. The sheep had a good run round and "had their tongues out” by the time they were in the *hed. Beauchamp came over after lunch and said the men had knocked off because it was too hot. Witness assembled the men on the board, and Slowe said: "They say they are wet.” Witness said to Slowe: “What nonsense is this, now. These sheep cannot be wet because they were put in the shed on Saturday night.” He then told Doyle, Nolan, Slowe and Reiher to go on shearing, because he knew them and did not want to see them make fools of themselves. Reiher said: "They are too wet for me,” witness repeating that it was impossible for them to be wet as they had been in the shed. He admitted having shaken his stick at Gillett, but he would have taken any of them back right till the end, if they had wanted to go on. Witness- said that it was possible for the shearers’ trousers to become wet through shearing sweaty sheep. He would rfct sack men for not shearing wet sheep, for he knew the provisions of the award.To Mr Mcßae, witness said that the

only explanation he could offer was that the shearers, when they got to the small cut which had been chased round the yards, thought that they were in wet sheep, whereas the sheep were only sweaty. Edwin Green, shepherd-manager at Braemar, said that out of a mob of 1300 sheep he had put all except 197 into the shed on Saturday night. The sheep were put in the shed on Saturday night and stayed there till Monday morning. James Whyte, musterer at Braemar, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. Bruce Murray, owner of Godley Peaks, said that his own shed would accommodate 850 or 900 sheep, and he was certain the Braemar shed would hold about 300 or 400 more. It was a much larger shed than the one at Godley Peaks. After hearing legal argument the Magistrate reserved his decision.