J. MACTCAY.I

41

1,— 9.

willing that we should go to the expense and trouble in connection with the case, but wanted to act as his own lawyer. He said our men were not able to conduct the case because they had no technical knowledge of seamanship. I said that the head office of his union in Dunedin had given us cases, that we had taken them into Court and successfully carried them through, and that if the head office had so much confidence in us, why could not his branch office do the same ? He said he had not the same confidence in us, and, of course, he did not bring the case before the Court through us. I might say that there are no cases brought before the Court in any part of the colony until they have been approved of by the Department in Wellington. Every Inspector has to send on the facts of each case, and ask us whether they are sufficient to warrant them taking the case into Court; and I may say that quite half the cases sent on to the head office for advice are refused. Mr. Tregear has told you that the Inspector at Dunedin had something like three hundred cases brought under his notice, with a request to take before the Court, and that he only selected fifty. There is not a day passes without the secretary of a union interviewing me re alleged breaches of awards, and sometimes they get very angry, and think we are not doing our duty when we refuse to take up frivolous cases; but most of them, being fairminded, afterwards agree that they may be settled without going into Court. The Court has just finished Invercargill, where every case taken into Court by the Department has been decided in our favour. That shows that the Judge considered that they were not in any way frivolous, but were cases that should be inquired into. Mr. Tregear having gone well over the ground I need not say more, but I may be able to answer any questions that may be put t ~> me. 38. Sir W. R. Russell] I should like to get a h'tle further information about the cases brought before the Department which are not gone on with. What proportion of these cases do you consider frivolous ? —I should say, quite half. I might say, more, but lam right in saying that probably only half the number of cases are gone on with. 39. These are brought by the secretaries of unions ? —Brought by secretaries and members of the unions working in the places complained of. 40. What do you consider that indicative of ? —Very often a man has been working for an employer, and they have a little tiff, and the man gets discharged. The employer may have committed some trifling breach, such as working a few minutes after hours, the man then goes to the secretary of his union and lays a complaint. We find that a great many of the cases originate in that way. They are disputes arising between a man and his employer. Sometimes a man falls in himself, because if he gets discharged and says he has been working for Jones, say, and ought to have got 9s. per day but only received Bs., I reply, " You have been a party to this breach as well as the employer," and presently he finds that he is cited before the Court and punished. 41. Do you think there is a tendency to make the Arbitration Court a Court for the settlement of private squabbles rather than to settle legitimate principles of arbitration ?—There was a tendency in that direction when the Act was new, but since the Department has had the power through its Inspectors, and has taken a firm stand, they find it is no use giving information about such cases. It is only human nature that if a man falls out with his employer he should want to " get at " that employer. I think that kind of thing is not growing, but rather decreasing. 42. You think the influence of the Bill is not detracted from by undue fussiness ? —No. 43. Mr. Aitken] You said that about half the cases only were taken into Court, and that the other half were settled: do you settle them privately ?—A great many of them we do not touch at all, but others we do settle. If it is a matter of a few shillings or a few pounds, and we are convinced that the employer has acted in ignorance, we consider it would be cruel and unwise to hale him before the Court. Mr. Tregear : I may add that a great deal of the trouble arises through the secretary of the union not going to the employer when a charge is made before him and hearing his side of the matter. We always go and hear the other side of the case, and when we do so, perhaps we find that it is a frivolous case, although it may not seem frivolous to the secretary. Sir W. R. Russell: Is there any method by which this frivolity can be stopped. It seems to me to weaken the Act. Mr. Tregear : The Court is frowning very much on any of the unions bringing any case whatever. Mr. Mackay : Mr. Justice Chapman said that he would look upon cases brought by the unions almost with suspicion. Mr. Kirkbride : It appeared to me that if there was not a charge made against the Inspectors, Mr. Young objected to the money arising out of the breaches of awards being paid into the hands of the Inspectors. As I understand it, this money lies in the hands of the Inspector to apply it as the Court may direct. Mr. Mackay: Yes. Mr. Kirkbride: It seemed to me that Mr. Young was suspicious that the Inspectors would not apply this money in a proper way, and he gave evidence to the effect that the secretaries of the unions were the proper persons to receive it, and suggested that this money should be placed in their hands instead of in the hands of the Inspectors. Has there been any unnecessary delay in applying these moneys in the absence of any direction from the Court ? What does Mr. Tregear think is the cause of the discontent on the part of the unions ? Mr. Tregear : The only reason I can think of is that sometimes there have been differences of opinion as to how the money should be distributed. In the Bill it says that the money shall be distributed according to the directions of the Court, and there can be no doubt that in the future, if that is the decision, Mr. Young or any one else could not object to the Inspectors having the money, because they could only hold it until the moment they were directed how to distribute it; but in the past there has been some doubt as to how the money should be distributed. Mr. Mackay : I think one of the to thatjis that when the unions brought cases themselves, if any penalties were inflicted, the money went to the union, whereas now

6—l. 9 r