Page:"Red"·Fed·Memoirs-Hickey-1925.pdf/18

 could not understand the position. Here was a union punished by the Industrial Court that just went on striking. The discovery was made that it was one thing to fine a union for striking, but another to make the members of it resume work.

All over New Zealand the press demanded that the Government again prosecute the Union for remaining on strike. But the Government, being wiser than angry editors, realising that unless it moved warily it was likely to make itself look foolish, refused to take any further action. It was then, apparently to appease the critics, that the Attorney-General (Dr. Findlay) gave his famous opinion that “a strike is not a continuous offence”; that the breach of the law occurred at the time when the miner, with pick suspended in air, made his resolution to strike and dropped his tool. At that identical moment the strike took place, and since its continuance but followed on that action, it was the action, not the continuance, that constituted the offence.

The strike continuing, the Union sent Mr. D. K. Pritchard (now of the Hutt) to tour the South Island, whilst I was dispatched through the Buller and the North Island. We were instructed to place our case before the Unions and to appeal for funds.

It was by no means an easy task. The old-time union official could not understand our attitude, with the result that we were refused support in many places where we had every reason to expect it. A case in point was the Millerton Miners’ Union. It refused us assistance on the grounds that we had flouted the Court. The few shillings received from there being the result of collections taken up by Mr. Tom McDermott.