MILITARY SERVICE BOARD.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LX, Issue 16852, 21 December 1916, Page 5

MILITARY SERVICE BOARD.

CHRISTCHURCH APPEALS.

(Per Press Association.) N CHIiiSTGHUKCH, Dec. 19. The Military Sea-vice Board s>at to* day. Ernest Crozier and George Orozier, dairy farmers, appealed on tue grounds - ' of undue hardship and contrary to thepublic interest, it was stated that il one of the brothers was called up they would have to seli half their milk run and allow the farm to lapse into a state of unproductivity. The Chairman (Mr. J. S. Evans, » *sM.) said the Board recognised that industries must be carried on, but did not see that because one of two brothers working a farm was called up, '„,} half the farm's productivity would be lost. He believed that the view of ail \-\ j t<he boards in the case of two brothers * working a farm was that one should b$ 4 called up and the other left to manage JV j witih assistance. Labour could be secured; it was oniiy a question of pay- \ ing for it. The appeal of George was allowed and that of Ernest dismiss-' td. ■• Harry Stanley Gordon, jeweller, and George Clifford Gordon, compositor, ,", I both of New Brighton, appealed on the ground of undue . hardship. It was - ►stated that they were the son 3of a wi- / 1 dow. One was prepared to go if the vi. I other was exempted. Harry's appeal' \ was dismissed and George's allowed. John Thompson, Papanui, appealed • ' on the ground of unfitness, and the appeal was allowed. Johii Henry Doherty, metal worker, * Christchurch, appealed on the grounds of undue hardship. His, stepfather was at the front and he supported the household. The appeal was adjourned a sine die. ■ - ,J "William Harry Jones, storekeeper, of t , f, Christehurch, appealed on the groun<is .^7 of hardship: On©* brother -was at Hi© -% \ front, and tbo, appellant had volunteer* A ed for service but was* rejected on ac- '- count of rheumatism. He had bought v!\ a store and incurred financial obliga- \t tionsu—-The case was allowed to stand ''? over until the was medically > examined. I The appeal of Marcus Gregory; J of Christehurch, on the grounds of un- '", due hardship, was dismissed. The ap-! "\ pellant managed his mother's private k hotel, and ran a farm on his own ac-' %• count. He desired six months' exemp-' tion, but was allowed one month m ? which to make arrangements. *" John David Marks, fChristchurch, a v ~. medical practitioner, 'appealed on the "i grounds that his calling up would be I contrary to.public'interesi;.- Appellant 4s stated that H'had viio'personal bbjec-'l"* tions to serving as a medical man, but L $ the reason why he was appealing was '* that he was not sure that. s the Medical j > Board would pass him asa medical man,, • 'r but rather for the iirenfeHes. He was ?» prepared to go as a sra©drca.l man, but '% considered that his services wene more1 necessary as a doctor here than ks a '^ combotant in the trenches. ' >t The Chairman said it made no differ^, ' ence to the commiinity'iKere whether v -i the appellant went as a toedical man or f "M a combatant.—Appellant admitted that' -^m no man was'-5 indispensable.—The Chair- 111 ■ man suggested that the,;appellant go i'l before the Medical Board and see how <m he got on. This course was decided *■ upon, and tli© appeal was adjourned sine \m Chas. Henry Melhuish, pickle mann- 1 M facturer, Christehurch, appealed on the ' .9 grounds of ,undue hardship. He stated. that lie was necessary in the business, S4 as no one else knew the secmts of pro- ? serving, pickles.—The 'appeal was dismissed, but the.appfllant"was allowed until the end of March. J The appea^ of John Stevens, Fendal- 'j ton, declared fit for home service, was T dismissed. . . »«y/ii.tt; , Charles James Go,uldittg,. telegraphist, Christehurch, appealed on tho> *■ ground of undue hardship. He waa ''I married in September, 1915, and had a ;fl wife and child to support. He ielti.H strongly-on;the point of}inarried men' 'I being called ■ up.^Th'e^ Chairman said^ ,1 no principle was invoivTEfd; as the ap- <';l psllant was married after the periodl Vm allowed by the Act. If appellant were ," exempted, the Board would have to «*. - empt all men mai-ried since May Ist, - •i-yi^Tt^iie appeal. wit's dismissed. * * Charles Ml S. Haddock, storeman of Christehurch, appealed on the grounds / of undue hardship. ; He was an only - son and had, to support his mother.— Ihe case was adjourned for three* montlis. ~ y .;..,;:; y :. ( „•.. '"> Thomas William iMaffey, dairy farmer. Little River, appealed on the grounds of undue hardship and con_{ * trary to public interest, H« had an in- . valid brother,dependent. upon him.—' ■ Ihe case was adjourned for six months.' '■ William Henry Harvey, market gar-1 ''■ dener, Heathopte'Valley, -appealed 001 ,■ the grounds of undue hardship and call-, I ing. His mother was dependent upom^H hun.—The case'was adjounied to allow"1 ■ .the appellant to be examined by th»' : l Medical Boai'd. ■ / ?■ ■ The case of .Reginald Gordon Douglas;?* ■ dental mechanic, Fendalton, was ad-"'"H journed until the next sittings to al\ -'H ■low.-the-appellantsto substantiate hw't'B statement regarding his nnajicial obli- *"■ gations. ' ■ Aaron McMillan, hawker Christ- ■ church- appealed on the grounds that - I calling up would b 6 contrary to public '.I intei-est. If medically fib he was will-' ■■ ing to go. The appeal, was disallow-" "I cd. - . <>■ The Board adjourned until to-mor-row.. ->■