TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10442, 23 April 1912, Page 2

TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL.

THE EXHIBITION CASK. JUDGMENT FOR COUNCIL. The hearing of tho claim of Frederick Ji. Meyer, assistant .secretary of the Trades and Labour Council's Exhibition, against the executive committee, for ou£of-poeket expenses was concluded liefor« Mr H. \\ . Bishop, S.M., at tho .Magistrate's Court this lnorninjr, when Mr "Weston was permitted to cross-examine certain of the witnesses for the defence. Mr Hunter appeared for defendants and Mr Weston lor pla'intiff. The Magistrate, before tho case was commenced, stated that during tho progress of tho evidence ho had lormed a strong opinion that the onus was on the defendants to show that their liability was Jiot established by the document produced m Court showing tho items in tho claim and endorsed by the general secretary, Ito had lormed the opinion up to a certain point that that document was binding on the defendants. J tut he admitted now that ho had formed a somewhat hasty opinion with regard to that, because he had been under the impression that tho bona lides of the document were not contested. Therefore he had directed his examination of witnesses to satisfy himself as to what extent the authority of tho general secretary wont, and whether he could pledge defendants' credit and to what extent. He was now bound to say, however, that his views had been entirely changed, both by tho ovidcncc of the general secretary himself and by that of some of tho defendants, who had stated that tho document. had not been before the committees and had not been adopted or approved. Ho had been distinctly under tho impression that the document had been before tho committee • and that they were therefore liable. Although ho disliked saying it, there was no doubt that his mistake had to a great extent been duo to tho shocking manner in which tho minutes had been kept, somo of them being absolutely unintelligible. It had como as a .surprise to him to find that the Council had continued to employ one who was really a, discredited agent. Having altered liis views with regard to the case, he had felt that he should give Mr Weston a chance to crossexamine any of the defendant witnesses, as he did not wish him to think that his claim had been prejudiced by his (the Magistrate's) hasty opinion. Ho felt that Mr W eston might perhaps have been under the impression that his claim had been prejudiced, and so lie had been given tho opportunity to fully cross-examine nnv oi tho defendant witnesses.

Harman Bicknell, auditor, said that he had checked tho petty cash items when making up the books. There were no vouchers. Ho was not aware that any members of the exccutivo had received honorariums or payments of any sort. Ono hundred thousand art union tickets had been printed but witness could not say whether they had all been delivered to tho Trades and Labour Council. On tho credit side of tho balance-sheet there was a sum of £1438 from the sale of art union tickets.

(rains B. Whiting said that lie had first heard that the general secretary had endorsed, plaintiff's account at tho previous hearing in the Court. Witness had not received any account from Mr .Meyer nor had ho received a copy of tho letter produced in Court in which plaintiff tendered his amended claim. Several letters addressed to witness at the exhibition had been opened by someone and some had not reached him at all, hut had been left opened in the executive's offico. Witness had discussed both plaintiff's accounts with Mr Young and he (Mr Young) had stated .that he did not approve of tho accounts nor had ho endorsed either account. Witness had lost confidence in Mr Young after tho close of tho exhibition.He Jiad always considered Mr Young to bo an honest man and had not been able to believo the statements mado by the Finance Committee till after the exhibition had been closed.

W. F. Cooper stated that plaintiff's amended account had not como before tho Finance Committeo though witness knew it had been before tho executive. Witness had not seen plaintiff's account nor was lie aware that it had been endorsed by the general secretary. He had. not heard Mr Young make any statement with regard to tho account. In tho amended account a number of the items had been increased in price. Mr Weston said that the whole exhibition had been a case of " muddle." and he considered that bis client should not bo penalised by tho " muddle." Tho general secretary had endorsed the account and then apparently lie had made no explanation to his Council. Young had apparently not been true either to the Council or to Meyer. He submitted that the endorsement of plaintiff's account was really the endorsement of the Council. It was hardly fair for the Council at this stage to discredit its officer when tlio account had been endorsed in November. Ho contended that tho effect of that endorsed account must stand and that tho plaintiff's claim should be allowed. The claim was quite a reasonable ono for a man who bad been organising an exhibition of the size of the Trades and Labour Council's exhibition.

Tlio Magistrate said that at one stage of tho case it looked as if tlio defendants were pledged by the endorsed account. ilr Weston was forced into the position of relying entirely on that document; but he (the "Magistrate) must be satisfied that that document was a bone fide statement of the position. The plaintiff in such a case must prove that he had direct authority or vicarious authority from a superior to incur expenditure. With regard to the conduct of tho general secretary, he hated to say unpleasant things reflecting on anyone, but it lind come as a revelation to him to hear that Mr Young's conduct bad been such that he had lost the confidence of his employers and had como into the Court as a discredited agent. Ho had had dealings with Mr Young on previous occasions. and had always found him to be a. man of integrity. Tho fact that his downfall had been to a large extent duo to-.drink only mado the case more deplorable. Tho Council, bearing in mind the big interests it had to conserve, would never have como into Court and discredited _ its own agent without a certain justification. Without implying anything against the parties, lie must say that he had been forced to the conelusion that Mr Young's attitude was not honest to his employers nor in their best interests. The onus was on the plaintiff to show that the endorsed account was a bono fide x document, and that he had authority or vicarious authority from a superior to incur expenditure. Ho (the Magistrate) had made a mistake at the beginning of the ease in nssuiniiifs certain facts, and, though that had not altered the result of the claim, he Jelt that it had raised hones in the plaintiff which could not bo fulfilled. Plaintiff had failed to prove his ease, and judgment would accordingly be for the defendants. The matter of costs' was held over for fourteen days, the Magistrate stating that it would please him if the Trades and Labour Council would accent the judgment without costs, us there was no doubt that the case had been tho outcome of the conduct of its secretary.