EIGHT SEAMEN ARRESTED

Timaru Herald, Volume CL, Issue 22063, 9 September 1941, Page 4

EIGHT SEAMEN ARRESTED

Disobeyed Lawful Commands

Friction Over Wages

(P.A.) AUCKLAND, September 8.

Arrested this morning on a charge that while in a ship secured in a safe harbour they did combine with other members of the crew to disobey lawful commands, eight members of the crew of a Panamanian ship at Auckland owned by a group of Greeks appeared before Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M. The charge was made under the Shipping and Seamen Act. 1908. Last week the crew went on strike over the question of their wages, and on Thursday a writ giving notice that the crew intended to claim £1342/10’3 in wages from the owners in an action in the Supreme Court was pinned to the mainmast. The accused comprised an Irish fireman and seven Greeks. They were represented by Mr T. R. Holmden, and Mr T. Henry appeared for the captain. The position is. said Mr Henry, that on August 29 the crew gave notice through the boatswain to the officers that they would not continue working. The following week the crew refused duty on September 1, 3. 3 and 4. On September 3 the men were addressed by the chief officer and requested to resume but refused. On Thursday information was given that the men were willing to return to work. Master’s Evidence The master of the ship, Captain Anapoulos. said most of the eight mtn arrested had been signed on at Shanghai in May for the round voyage. Tne ship had been discharging since August 25. He had been notified that the men would return to their duties on Thursday afternoon, but had ordered the second officer not to accept any offer as he wanted to settle the whole, matter. “I thought it was Only bluff on the part of the crew," he explained. He had since accepted the offer by asking the crew to shift the ship to a new berth to fuel, but they had refused. To Mr Holmden. the captain admitted that he had had no trouble with the men until they reached Manila. He had signed an agreement with the crew increasing their wages by 50 per cent for war risk, but alleged that he signed the agreement because he was forced to and it was therefore invalid.

Nevertheless, said Mr Holmden, you acceded to the men’s wishes but waited until you got to New Zealand before telling them you would not pay them the extra money. The captain: Yes. I was sure they would strike as soon as they were told. I wanted to be at a port where there was a Panamanian consul. The

agreement was illegal, aid If I had paid the money I would have had to pay it back to the company from my own pocket. Safeguard Against Desertion The captain further admitted that the men’s wages were not paid to date. According to Panamanian law. he

explained, the crew had to be paid at the end of the voyage. It was a safeguard against desertion at ports of call. The men wete given advances if they asked for them. He had picked these eight men out of the crew because he considered they* were the leaders. He had delayed having the men arrested until the ship had been cleared, because he feared the waterside workers might strike in sympathy. Mr Holmden: “The crew have had the ship arrested so the ship's officers have arrested the crew." He questioned whether ( the court had jurisdiction to deal with a Panamanian ship.

“I will convict you men and order you to come up for sentence if called upon,” said the Magistrate. “You go back to your ship and work. The other court will fix up the matter of your wages. In the meantime you go and do your job.”