TRADES UNION CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6794, 14 May 1900, Page 3

TRADES UNION CASE.

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION AUIS xJ y:yyy, , The case Christchurch. :'■> Boot-' makers' Society v. Arthur Lu^y,\wWcT_' had been adjourned by consent from last Thursday, was called on again at the Magistrate's Court this morning. Mr,. Kippenberger appeared for the Society, and' Mr Harper for defendant. The claim w«w>f(*#"£2 19s, for contributions due to the Spciety , :y''When the case wa'3 before Mr Beetham _ast^T_nirsday, .Mr Fisher, a 'trustee of the Soqie^y, Stated that the Society was a trades union, regis- , tered according to the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and it was, under this Act the proceedings were being taken';" The defendant, before the last award of the .Arbitration Court, held a clearance as. 'a ftinreman, but according to that award Ids clearance was cancelled, and h.' became liable for contributions, which have accumulated to £2 19s. Defendant's solicitor contended that the Society could not take proceedings in Court for subscriptions due under the Trades Unions Act. of 1878. In reply to' Mr Beetham's querry as to what remedy tne Unions had against members who did not pay, Mr Harper replied the Unions could expel such members. He interpreted the Conciliation and Arbitration Act to permit Unions to register without proceedings being taken de novo, but did not permit them to institute proceedings for the recovery of subscriptions. His Worship said *l,_ie matter lay in the fact of the Trades Unions Act not having been repealed. This Act gave Unions no power to recover, and if contributions were to be recovered it must be through the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. He would like to know if there wes any special c^use in the Act which would apply to the oase. Mr Fisher said he did not know of any. Mr Harper suggested that the Society should be represented by counsel, and Mr Fisher stated that, as the last case had "been before the Court previous to the Arbitration Court's award, it had not been thought necessary -to-be represented by counsel. He asked fotvan adjournment, which was granted. This moving, Mr Harper explained that he had), been undei the impression that ihe Conciliation and Arbitration Act did not permit of members being sued for subscriptions, but he had since discovered that the Act contains a clause which so provides. That had been the ground of his contention, and therefore, the amount claimed had been paid. into Court, and the case settled with Mr Kippenberger, the Society's solicitor.