TROUBLE ON MAHIA

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 76, Issue 109, 11 May 1933, Page 8

TROUBLE ON MAHIA

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS CREW BEFORE THE COURT [ Per Press Association. I WELLINGTON, May 10. Thirty members of the crew of the Shaw Savill and Albion Company's cargo vessel Mahia appeared before Mr E. Page, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court this afternoon. Seven were charged with continual wilful disobedience to lawful commands, two with, wilful disobedience to a lawful command. and twenty-one with being absent from their ship without leave. Mr 11. F. O’Leary appeared for the Shaw, Savill and Albion Company, and Mr F. W. Oagley for the accused. Those charged with disobedience to lawful commands entered pleas of not guilty, the first, man charged, George Armstrong, stating that he refused to take the ship to sea with the boatswain, but that, he would do so otherwise.

Mr O'Leary said that the charges were made against the men under section 225 of tre Imperial Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. Outlining the •circumstances that had led up to the present trouble Mr O’Leary said that when the Mahia was six or seven days off. the New Zealand coast an altercation took place between the boatswain and an ordinary seaman named Winters. They came to blows, and it was alleged by the boatswain that he was struck first. He retaliated and blood was drawn on Winter’s face. It appeared that they were separated. The boatswain then went about his ordinary duties and within five minutes Winters went over the rail and committed suivide. When the vessel arrived at tho first New Zealand port. New Plymouth, a thorough investigation was made, and the conclusion arrived at was that the boatswain was in no way responsible for AVinter’s death. No charge was brought, or could be brought, against, him. The police had also been informed of the circumstances of Winter’s death, and it was held that no action leould be taken. Since leaving New Plymouth the crew had decided that they would not work the vessel unless tho boatswain was removed. The vessel arrived here last Friday, and on Monday a deputation was made to the captain with a view to having tho boatswain removed. The captain, however, refused the crew ’s request. He gave them permission to go ashore and obtain any advice they desired. Subsequently seven of the seamen had refused to do work at the request of the boatswain. AVhen it was decided to take the ship out. into the streani the seven, seamen and a number of firemen left the ship.

Captain Andrews, master of the Mahia, was then called to give evidence along the lines indicated by Mr O ’Leary. One of the defendants Harry Cecil Elby, an able seaman, said in evidence that right from the day tho vessel sailed from London the boatswain had been getting on to Winters and used to call him most terrible names which absolutely goaded the young fellow into striking the boatswain first. On the Sunday before Winters went overboard, Winters was showing some photographs to a number of men sitting on a hatch. The boatswain, who was amongst them, commenced to laugh, and when Winters asked him what he was laughing at the boatswain had him logged for insolence. Winters, said witness, did not get fair play from the boatswain. “I have never refused an order.” said witness; “only from the boatswain. We are all willing to go baVk to the ship provided the boatswain. out. of it.” Cross-examined, witness said he had no complaint to make about the captain. At the conclusion of the evidence, Mr Ongley, for the men. said he had nothing to say regarding the merit of tho case. The accused were apparently an honest, body of men, and believing that the boatswain had goaded Winters to death, preferred imprisonment and deportation rather than to sail with him.

The magistrate said he would give his decision in the morning.