War resister denied union membership Do U.S. rules apply here? ~ By RICHARD ORLANDINI TORONTO — For many Cana- dian trade unionists, the strug- gle for Canadian autonomy in the trade union movement is simply a philosophical problem to be debated at Canadian Labor Congress conventions every two .. But. for Jehm Harvey, his wife Diane and their daughter Crys- tal, the continuing struggle for Canadian autonomy is a matter of dollars. and cents — and a job. has been refused a job in his trade in Canada by the international union that he be- longed to, because he does not have an honorable discharge from the U.S. armed forces. In 1967, John Harvey was liv- ing in Maywood, New Jersey and while he was there he ap- plied and was accepted as an apprentice in Local 84 of the United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters. He worked as an apprentice plumber in the New Jersey local for about one year and then, facing the draft, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy. Be- fore he went into the armed forces he received an honorable withdrawal card from his union. After two years in the Navy, he received orders to go to Viet- nam as a boiler technician on an aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Shangrila. In Harvey’s words, “I didn’t think that the war in Viet- nam was a_ just war and I felt that the U.S. had no business there, so, rather than go to Viet- - nam, I deserted.” He lived underground in the U.S. and eventually made_ his way to Canada. In August, 1971, he was admitted, by the Cana- dian authorities, as a landed im- migrant. Shortly after his arri- val in Canada, he applied for a renewal of his apprenticeship at Toronto Local 46 of the Plum- bers and Steamfitters. Hugh Loveday was the secre- tary of Local 46 at that time and it was Loveday who handled the application. Loveday told the Tribune in an interview that he “sent the application to the U.S. headquarters of the Plumbers and Steamfitters.” According to the International’s constitution all transfers must be approved by the union’s president, Martin -Ward, in Washington, D.C., the union’s headquarters. Loveday did not receive a reply imme- diately from Washington, D.C. and Harvey became impatient with waiting for. the approval from the international and began Morgentaler goes to jail Court overrules th By JACKIE GREATBATCH OTTAWA—“I spent five years in a concentration camp in Nazi Germany. I am not looking. forw- ard to spending 18-months in a Canadian jail,” Dr. Henry Mor- gentaler told a press conference March 26 after a Supreme Court of Canada ruling dismissed his right to appeal a conviction of performing an illegal abortion. “I do not regret what I did,” Morgentaler said, “I have saved ‘hundreds of women from death and injury.” The Montreal gynecologist was charged in 1973 with performing an illegal abortion on a 26-year- old woman ‘after police raided his downtown Montreal clinic. The doctor and his patient had not consulted a therapeutic abor- tion committee, and Morgentaler was therefore charged with viol- ating Section 251 of the Criminal Code. Morgentaler’s name has since become synonimous with the struggle to repeal the restric- tive abortion law. Acquitted by a Jury In the initial trial in a Quebec court, a jury acquitted Morgen- taler of the charges. The doctor’s lawyer had argued that other provisions exempt people from criminal responsibility in per- forming an operation if it is deemed necessary or reasonable in the circumstances. The Quebec Court of Appeals subsequently overturned the rul- ing, contending that the trial judge was incorrect in instruct- _. ing the jury to consider Morgen- taler’s defence. ; The March 26 decision upheld the conviction, regardless of the fact that the decision of a trial by jury was being overruled. Chief Justice Bora Laskin was one of the three dissenting judges in the 6-3 ruling. He be- lieved that the appeal should have been allowed and that the jury acquittal should have been allowed to stand. — PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, APRIL 4, 1975—Page 8 3% PA The judges unanimously re- jected an appeal argument that Section 251 contradicts. the Canadian Bill of Rights, and is therefore not valid. - At a press conference after the ruling, Morgentaler said, “I hope my sacrifice won’t be in vain. I hope it will spur people who care for human justice and women to intensify their effort. “My only regret is that women are still suffering because of a restrictive law that tells them in calling Loveday at Toronto Local 46 on a regular basis to try to find out what was causing the delay. Finally, after several in- quiries, Harvey got a reply. No Honorable Discharge Loveday, the local secretary, was instructed to tell him (Har- vey) that the application was re- fused “because he could not pro- duce honorable discharge papers from the U.S. Navy.” On several occasions, Loveday brought Har- vey’s case before the interna- tional but on each occasion he was told that the international would not accept a U.S. armed forces deserter into either a Ca- nadian or U.S. local of the inter- national union. : -After Harvey told-his story to the Tribune and produced docu- -ments to back up what he had said, the Tribune contacted the Canadian Labor Congress’ secre- tary-treasurer, Donald Mont- gomery. When questioned about the legality of an international union being able to refuse an application in Canada on the grounds that there was no honor- able discharge from the USS. armed forces, Montgomery said that he “couldn’t make a com- ment.” But contrary to Montgomery’s \ . Dr. Morgentaler, with his son Abraham, turns himself in. theory they can have an abor- tion, but in practice denies the right.” : Morgentaler called the more _ than 6,000 abortions he perform- ed in his ‘Montreal clinic his moral obligation to help women whose alternative was to be “butchered on kitchen tables,” to have unwanted children and go through months of anguish. Morgentaler pioneered suction abortion equipment in his search for the safest methods of abor- non-committal response, dele- gates to the 10th Constitutional Convention of the Canadian La- bor Congress did pass an autono- my resolution in Vancouver, May 1974, stating “that the in- ternational unions take whatever action is necessary to ensure that the Canadian membership will not be prevented by consti- tutional requirements or policy decisions from participating in the social, cultural, economic and political life of the Cana- dian community.” According to several members of Local 46 in Toronto, the In- ternational was interferring in Canadian rights when it took the decision to forbid Harvey his membership. “It doesn’t matter whether Harvey is a deserter or John ‘ond Diane Harvey ond their daughter, Crystal. not,” one Local 46 member @ © the Tribune, “what is import? is that the Canadian governm? accepted him.into the country" a landed immigrant who ci apply for, and work in Can If that’s the government’s ‘pé tion, then why should the national union be able to ré, the application of a work Canada?” ee That is also the way HarW looks at the question. “The * quests by the local union,” 4) vey said, “went unheeded by “ international union and the 0% way left for me to fight is | - carry on the battle in public 2 in the press. It isn’t only my that is on the line, but also 4) rights of Canadian workers “ any international union. e people in anti-abortion sentence EDITORIAL Without re-examining the original Morgentaler court case, | in which Dr. Morgentaler of Montreal was acquitted by 2 precedent. ruling class. 12-member jury of performing an illegal abortion, and in- deed without arguing the many possible points about ad- ministration of abortions (a three-member therapeutic abor- tion committee as decreed by the government, a doctor- patient decision, or some other form) this paper considers it necessary to make two urgent points. It is cause for consternation that the decision of a jury — (acquittal) was turned into its-epposite (conviction) by the — Quebec Court of Appeal, and even worse that this was backed up by six of the nine Supreme Court of Canada justices, with Chief Justice Bora Laskin dissenting. To have — ordered a new trial would have questioned the adequacy of | that particular jury; as it is, every jury decision from now | until this breach of justice is healed, is in danger of being reversed. The precedent is there—a very, very dangerous The second point is that abortion, must be recognized aS | a medical phenomenon and dealt with as such, free of mys" — ticism and the Criminal Code. Canada’s Communists in com | vention last May determined to work for “provision 0 | adequate medical facilities to enable women to freely exer” cise their right to obtain abortions,” and to “remove abor- tions from the Criminal Code.” : Federal government intransigence on this, which ha’ evidently influenced the Supreme Court to deal a damaging blow té the jury system needs to be fought for along with |, other rights increasingly threatened by the reactionary — tion. Of the thousands of women. who came to Morgentaler for - help, many paid no fee, and others paid what they could af- ford. “Back-street” abortionists, whose facilities are usually un; clean and endanger women’s health, charge high fees for abor- tions which often cause lasting damage to patients. The Canadian Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Law remains determined to work for full legalization of abortion, “to make abortion like all other me- dical procedures, a private mat- ter between a patient and a physician.” . Hypocritical Government Dr. Morgentaler accused fede- ral officials of persecution. He accused Justice Minister Otto — -while maintaining a law Lang, who is well-known for anti-abortion stance, as one of the greatest oppress0! 1 women in Canada. The attitt is “the greatest hypocrisy the part of a government wh? | jumping on the bandwagot International Women’s chat Mo" cruel and unjust.to women, gentaler said. The doctor’s lawyer, Armand Sheppard charge not a good day for civil libet in this country if a person ot be acquitted by 12 fellow ‘ic zens but then have this v@ etl overturned by a court of a Ai “T am sad and a bit shoc what happened today,” Mor taler said, “I was acquit jury.”