H.—2

142

246. The process is, when you want any men for any of your ships, to ask Mr. Barns; he selects them from the association, and you have nothing else to do with it ?—Nothing at all. If we have any objection to any man we notify that we do not want that man. 247. Do you remember being present at a meeting of the joint committee at which there was a discussion as to the registration of this association under the Conciliation Act? —Yes. 248. It was decided, was it not, owing to the wish of the employers, that the society should not be registered?— They did not see any advantage to be gained by it. 249. Is it, in your opinion, an advantage to the men that this society should be formed as a benefit society ?—I believe it is; as a matter of fact, although I am chairman of the society, I would rather see it burst up. 250. For what reason ?—Well, as a matter of fact, we do not get the same work out of the men. 251. You would rather have the handling of them entirely in your own hands ?—Yes. It is in the interests of the men themselves that the work is arranged as it is now ; old and young get their fair share, whereas the old men would be left out entirely. 252. Hon. Major Steward.] You would only take the most capable men in that case?— Yes. 253. Can you tell us precisely what took place at the meeting in Christchurch ?—I remember Mr. Wood, the secretary of the workmen's section of the committee, was there, and he read a letter he had addressed to the Eegistrar in Wellington, with a view to getting the association brought under the Conciliation Act. The question was discussed at the time, and I think Mr. Cunningham took a large part in the discussion. I pointed out that Mr. Wood and Mr. Burke were also members of another union and officials of that union, and should not be officials of our association, and consequently they were asked to retire. 254. The Chairman.] What union was that?— The Casual Wharf-labourers' Union. 255. Mr. Fisher.] What was the objection to men who otherwise could not obtain employment forming the Casual Labourers' Union ? —They had the same opportunity of obtaining employment. This Wood, at any rate, I may say, is one man whom we have boycotted for the last two or three years, probably more because he was taken out of one of the steamers, whether through broaching cargo' or' not' I cannot say, helplessly drunk ; and I believe he has done the same thing in other boats, but that lam not prepared to speak about. As long as he was a member of the association, and so long as there were no objections to his character as a sober man and a good workman, he was entitled to a fair share of work. 256. That is one case ; but that allegation could not apply to the whole sixty members who comprise the Casual Labourers' Union ? —Certainly not. lam surprised to hear it, but I cannot dispute it. At the time of this meeting there were about eight or ten members only in the Casual Labourers' Union, which had just been formed ; in fact, at the time I was speaking I had seen a copy of the rules. 257. What was the object of this union : was it formed because of the existence of the rules of this association ?—I do not know anything about the union, and have no idea what they are doing. There is nothing in these rules to prevent these men getting a fair share of work. As a matter of fact, Mr. Burke has refused work for the association, although a member ; he prefers to work for the railway. 258. He is not now a member of your association ?—He is still a member, so far as I know ; he was financial when I last heard. I may be wrong. 259. These men told us that because of the existence of these rules they formed the Casual Labourers' Union of their own, and that because they joined that union, so we were informed, they were not allowed to sit in the room with you ?—That only referred to the members of the committee ; it could not refer to the sixty members. Only Wood and Burke were spoken to that night, because besides being on our committee they were also officials of the Casual Labourers' Union. It being against the rules that they should be connected with any other association, they were asked to retire from the meeting. John George Thomas Wood made an affirmation, and was examined. 260. The Chairman.] What is your business ?—I am a wharf-lumper at Lyttelton. 261. Do you belong to the Lyttelton Lumpers' and Wharf-labourers' Association?— Yes; lam a financial member. 262. You are still employed by that association?— No. 263. Can you tell us what was the cause of your employment ceasing ?—There are several reasons ; one was that I did not get sufficient work to live on. Of course, I have been an agitator ; I have been pointed out as an agitator, and as one trying to establish unionism in Lyttelton. 264. And you think that was not agreeable to the Stevedoring Association?— Yes. 265. Do you remember an attempt being made to register the association under the Conciliation Act? —Yes. 266. There was a meeting of the joint committee in Christchurch?—Yes; I was secretary of the association at the time. 267. Do you remember Mr. Burke and yourself being present ?—Yes. 268. Can you tell us what passed ? —During the time I was secretary a majority of the men were in favour of registering the association under the Arbitration Act, and several meetings were called—of course, the minute-book will prove that there was a majority in favour of registration. That was in March, 1895, when a resolution was passed by a large majority of the men in Lyttelton that the association should be registered. 1 took steps to register the society, and a meeting of the joint committee was called in Christchurch. I was asked to produce the correspondence in connection with registering the society, which I did. The employers' section of the committee said they would have nothing to do with registration; that they were the Board