PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
RE
24 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE
REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
54
two, and I submit with regard to those two the case breaks down on the threshold, because there is no evidence, or no sufficient evidence of inducement. I will take the weakest case first, the case of Evans. You remember that Evans said he went, in consequence of the advertisement, to Mr. Hetherington, and received from Mr. Hetherington or was it Wright? I forget which,
Mr. COMYNS CARR: It was Wright.
Mr. RAEBURN Yes, Wright, who said he received in answer those pamphlets which have been referred to, but he told you, Sir John, that that was all he had to do with Mr. Hetherington. What he did subsequently I do not remember, nor how long afterwards it was that he went to Messrs. Wainwright Brothers, who are the principal agents for the Royal Holland Lloyd. From Messrs. Wainwright Brothers he received a similar set of pamphlets, and through Messrs Wainwright Brothers he booked his ticket and went out to the Argentine. I submit to you, Sir, there is absolutely no evidence of inducement by Mr. Hetherington there, and that that case
fails at once.
The MAGISTRATE: Although Mr. Comyns Carr may be going to say that there was inducement, yet I think it would be right in this case to withdraw this summons for this reason. Though Mr. Evans said, "I was induced by this advertisement, but I did not go through Mr. Hetherington," it is just possible that is what influenced It is just possible Mr. Hether- him, yet it might be right for you to withdraw it. ington might have said to him, " You must remember this is the arrangement,” and he did not give him the opportunity of inducing him to go.
Mr. COMYNS CARR: Certainly, Sir John, if that is your opinion.
Mr. RAEBURN: Then, Sir, the other case to which I wish to refer as being on a somewhat similar footing is the case of Parsons, the telegraph engineer. He went to Mr. Hetherington and saw him personally, and he told us some story about making up his mind to go because he saw a map with railways upon it, and he knew that if there were railways in course of construction there were telegraphs, and he led you to believe this gentleman, Mr. Parsons-that on that representation he was think I am right But he told you also, induced by Mr. Hetherington to go out. in saying, that he went to the Consul, and I suppose received pamphlets from the Consul; in other words, he did not rely upon Mr. Hetherington's inducement, but went and verified or tried to verify the information for himself. He went to head- quarters. He further told you that he had letters of introduction to persons in the Argentine, and for that reason he went out. He took advantage of the £7 fare. although he is not the sort of man that this emigration law was intended for at all. I submit on that, Sir, it cannot be said that any representation by Mr. Hetherington induced Mr. Parsons to go out to the Argentine. That is my submission with regard to him. Then, Sir, the next thing is, what was the representation which Mr. Hetherington made to these people? I will take it generally now, and it will apply in what I am going to say to all of them. I tried at an earlier stage of the prose- cution to get it definitely from the prosecution how the representation was supposed to have been made, and it was stated that the representation was made in all these documents, in other words, what you have to consider is, what is the general effect of all that was said, or of all that was given, what was the information that was given to these men, either by word of mouth or by means of these documents? If one reads through these pamphlets and reads the evidence which these witnesses have given, I submit that it is reasonably clear, that the representation which was made was that the Argentine Government promised to find work for all through their State Labour Bureau. That, I submit, Sir John, is a representation which is made over and over again in these documents, not a representation that these men are going to get work, but a representation that by the law of the Argentine Republic work is found by the State Labour Bureau, which is a Government Department out there. If that be so, Sir John, I submit to you, with the greatest confidence, that so far from that having It may be that been false, it has been proved up to the hilt to be absolutely true. the Argentine Government, possibly through lack of work out there, temporary lack of work, have failed to fufil their promise, but that, I submit, is not a matter for which Mr. Hetherington is responsible. They have promised, and Mr. Hether- ington to these people has promised, that work would be found for them, and these people have found that those promises have not been fulfilled. That may be per- fectly true, but if the representation is as I submit it is, then no false representation has been made at all to any of these people by Mr. Hetherington. Now, Sir John, assume against me that the representation made was that work would be found by
55
the State Labour Bureau, Have the prosecution shown that that is untrue? I submit they have entirely failed. They have called no one before you to support it but those men who are interested parties; not a single person has been called from the Argentine Government, and we have had nobody here from the British Consul. They have not called him. How does that matter rest? Not a single one of these men endeavoured for more than a fortnight, and one of them for only a week, to find work; in other words, their patience was exhausted at the end of a week in the case of one, and a fortnight in the case of the others. That the Argentine Govern- ment was trying to find them work through the State Labour Bureau is, I submit, perfectly clear, because you remember they practically all said that their names were taken down and their addresses taken down, and their occupations taken down. Then, Sir, there is this further significant fact, that when this first batch of seven went to the British Consul, who apparently is a gentleman who is determined to put this down-I am bound to say that--when they went to the British Consul the State Labour Bureau themselves asked that they should be given a little further time, as apparently a fortnight was not enough, and a further week was granted. That shows that the Labour Bureau were doing or trying to do something. Of course, they cannot command work on the nail, so to speak. The best they could do was to say that it must take some time. I do not know, but I am entitled to put it in my favour because the contrary has not been proved, that if these men had waited a little longer, they might have found work, and I submit they have failed to prove that work was not to be found.
Now, Sir, there is another fact. My friend put it to Mr. Hetherington when he gave evidence, did he know that 70 of the men that he, Hetherington, had sent out in I think the number was 70 out of 143 or 1912, had returned without finding work? something of that sort. I am entitled to have it assumed in my favour that the other 73 men were found work through the Labour Bureau. As there is no evidence that they had come back, apparently it is otherwise; they stayed there and found work.
Now, Sir, on facts like that, is my client to be convicted of having made a false representation that work would be found for these people? One of the men who They went out in this batch found work through the State Labour Bureau. happened to have a post open for him apparently. Can you be surprised that they had not a post open for a dentist, or possibly for a telegraph engineer, or possibly for a tailor? It is ridiculous to suggest that, because for a fortnight work was not found for these men, my client is to be convicted of having made a false representa- Work will be found tion in that regard. Supposing this appeared in a contract,
by the State Labour Bureau." The law would imply that that meant work would be found in a reasonable time. Can you say, can anyone say, that a fortnight was a reasonable time in which the Government should find work for these men? Then, Sir, the next matter, the fourth head is, did Mr. Hetherington know that the repre- For that purpose sentation, whatever it may be, that he was making was false?
I will assume that you are of opinion that the representation was made that work would be found and that the Argentine Government promised to find work. How is Mr. Hetherington's knowledge proved? You have had called before you here two gentlemen, Mr. Jones and Mr. Macnaghten, from the Emigration Board. They gave an account of this interview which they had with Mr. Hetherington on the 10th January, 1913, and it is on this interview, and on this interview only, that my friend's case of knowledge rests. What is it suggested that these gentlemen did? Mr. Jones said that he went to Mr. Hetherington with some petition in his pocket. What the document was I have not the slightest idea, nor does Mr. Hetherington know, as it was not shown to him, but in that petition Mr. Hetherington is supposed to have been mentioned as the chief offender with regard to sending people out. They said, one or other of them, in the account of which they gave of this interview. that they told Mr. Hetherington that they had such a petition and that he was mentioned in it as the chief offender. They say they used that word. That Mr. Hetherington, I think, denied absolutely. Portions of the interview he did not remember, but that part of it he absolutely denied, and I submit it is inconsistent with the sort of interview which was taking place. Mr. Macnaghten said that they went down to Mr. Hetherington to make friendly representations. When you go to a man to make friendly representations, you do not tell him you have got a petition from a lot of destitute emigrants saying that he is the chief offender, or use words like that; and I submit the evidence on that was wholly unsatisfactory. Now what do they say they warned him about. They say they told him that they had