W T WILSON ]

23

I.— 6a.

3 Are all the men who belong to the casual staff of the Railway workshops and Railway goodssheds allowed to join the' Amalgamated Society ?—Yes. 4. And notwithstanding that the total strength of the whole society is only 6,400. Is it not a fact that there are 13,000 men employed in the Railways altogether?— Probably there are if you take the First Division into account, but they have an organization of their own." 5 And including the casuals that joined, the total strength of the Amalgamated Society is only 6,4oo?—Yes, about that. 6. Mr Iline ] You mentioned the First Division : do you say they have a separate representation of their own?— Yes, a separate society of their own —that is', the "clerical division. 7 And do they have access to the Ministerial ear?— They have their usual conferences. Ido not know what methods they adopt. 8. But they have a separate society?— Yes. William Andrew Veitch further examined. (No. 16.) 1 Mr Kennedy ] I wish to ask you, Mr Veitch, whether the last Conference of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants did not consider a proposal to give the Engine-drivers, Firemen, and Cleaners' Association direct, representation, and, if so, what was the result so far as the Conference was concerned ?—The Conference considered the question from three points, and after fully discussing the matter decided on a certain course. But first of all I must say that they did not discuss the question of giving the locomotive-men direct representation. The question was whether four branches would be given direct representation—that is, the locomotive-running, workshops, maintenance-men, and traffic-men—whether each of those sections should have equal and direct representation. Then we arranged that we would alter the rules to give equal representation to each of the departments, but that the members would be elected from the whole service—that is, by all the members of the service. The idea of that was to give eacli man access to every member of the society Since that ballot has been taken 2 I asked you whether it was discussed, and what was the result of that discussion—did they grant it or did they refuse it?—l must qualify it, lam not going to allow any man to put words into my mouth. The explanation I have given is the position. The matter was discussed, and the decision arrived at by the Conference is that which I have just explained to the Committee. 3. I should like you to let us know a little more about that letter you have put in as evidence. You said it was written in 1880 in. Christchurch, and later on you said it was written in 1884, I have been in Christchurch all my life, and I should like you to let me know who wrote the letter and who signed it?—The letter was sent in. I was not in the service at the time, but the fact is that the letter was sent in, but Ido not know who signed it. Any one who wants to see it can do so at the head office of the A.S.R.S. 4. Do you think, as a railway unionist, you have the confidence of the amalgamated men in the district you reside in?— Now, Mr Chairman, lam asked to be a thought-reader Ido not know. 5. Mr McArley ] You said you pressed the engine-drivers and firemen's grievances with force : will you state to the Committee what force you used to press those grievances any more than the association could use ?—What I meant to say is this that the Amalgamated Society, being a large bod)' and having great influence, could certainly carry greater influence than a few men bickering amongst themselves. First of all, the society would represent all branches of the service, and when we went forward with any request it would be recognized as coming from the whole of the Railway service, with the influence, and consent, and numerical weight of those men behind them. If any one section of the service came along with one demand to the General Manager he would have to consider the aspect—he would have to say ' Weil, if I give it to these men am I going to do an injustice to the other men?" and then he would have to consider- the other unions before he considered the matter placed before him by this one section 6. Why did you say at the last meeting before this Committee that you had no power to force grievances to be remedied?—We do not have any power to force. Any'sensible man knows that. The General Manager is still in charge of the Railway Department—we are not, I only wish we were for a day or two. What is the good of my corning along here and saying that we will insist on certain things being done, when the General Manager- is in charge of the Department? 7 At the last meeting before this Committee you said that the Amalgamated Society had grievances ?—Yes. 8 Why have you not rectified them.? —Because I am. not General Manager 9 You said you had power What power have you got, either political or industrial?—l have already explained, and I cannot see that I can give any more information on the subject. All through the last two years, since we have been conducting this society, we have been doing our best for the locomotive-men. Mr Ronayne will admit that/and also that we have done our very best to get the grievances of the railwaymen redressed. 10. You practically admit in your statement that you can do no more than the Engine-drivers' Association can do? —No, I do not. 11 Mr Milroy ] I think you said that before recognition could be granted it would be only fair to put the question to the vote of the whole of the members. Is that what you mean? Do you mean that there should be a vote taken on the question, and that the members of the society should be consulted?—l was explaining to the Committee that in my opinion you must have either one system or the other —you must either have the sectional system' or the amalgamation system. Then I explained that in my opinion the natural effect of splitting up the Railway service into sections would be to detrimentally affect the iuterests of the whole service, and I felt 'it was only fair that