1947 Royal New Zealand Navy mutinies

During April 1947, the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) experienced a series of non-violent mutinies amongst the enlisted sailors of four ships and two shore bases.

The main cause was the poor rates of pay compared to the rest of the New Zealand Defence Force and equivalent civilian wages, exacerbated by the release of a long overdue government review which failed to address the issue.

The poor living and working conditions aboard RNZN ships was another issue, compounded by sailors having no effective way to make dissatisfaction known to the higher ranks.

At the time of the initial mutiny, the cruiser HMNZS Bellona was in Australian waters, and when the ship returned to New Zealand in late April, several sailors sought discharge.

The mutinies and the resulting manpower shortage forced the RNZN to remove Black Prince from service, and set the navy's planned development and expansion back by a decade.

[2] Sailors were forced to accept this instead of seeking work elsewhere, as they had enlisted for set periods during the war; some were required to complete twelve years service.

[6] Some attempted to secure a discharge as they thought there would be better opportunities and pay in civilian jobs, but demobilisation efforts were focused on the personnel who had signed up under "Hostilities Only" conditions.

[5] New Zealand authorities had reluctantly agreed to this, but the committees were banned from considering or making proposals to the officers on the matters of pay, shipboard routine, or service conditions; the issues that affected the sailors the most.

[9] When Arbutus finally limped into port, the ship's company were informed that they would only remain at Philomel long enough to take on aviation fuel and supplies to be delivered to the Cook Islands.

[13] After addressing those in the gymnasium, Phipps went to the canteen to talk to the sailors there: after asking them to return to duty and giving the news that the pay scales would be published that evening, he informed them that they had already committed acts of indiscipline, and "would have to take the consequences".

[16] They also took care to ensure their actions could not be attributed to external factors; for example, when one sailor consumed some rum with his lunch, he was encouraged to return to duty, so nobody could claim the mutineers were acting under the influence of alcohol.

[16] While heading for the main gate, Commander Phipps intercepted the group, and "argued desperately" for the sailors to return to duty for the duration of Governor-General of New Zealand Sir Bernard Freyberg's visit, scheduled for late that afternoon.

[20] By 08:10, the mutineers began to march to the gates of Philomel, where, upon being stopped by the Master-At-Arms, they asked to present their demands in relation to lower-deck committees and the foregoing of punishment for the mutiny to Commander Phipps.

[8] Although willing to listen to the sailors, the only response Phipps could give was that they should return to duty, accept punishment for their actions, and bring their concerns to official channels.

[8] While still at the gates, Doctor Martyn Finlay, the local member of parliament, addressed the mutineers and informed them that the government would consider their requests, with the prime minister to respond in two hours.

[8] Those remaining listened as Fraser told them that queries regarding the pay package would have been better handled through official channels, and that the sailors should return to work and accept any punishment offered, but they did not take his advice.

[21] The majority of the mutineers stripped off their rank and category insignias, medal ribbons, and good conduct badges, and returned to the base to collect their effects.

[22] However, the Master-At-Arms would only allow them onto the base individually and with an escort, and they could only claim their belongings after returning all items of uniform and equipment, even if they had been paid for through wage deductions.

[22] Only 23 men returned to duty; they, along with the 18 British sailors, were used to form a temporary ship's company for Arbutus, allowing her to depart for the Cook Islands that afternoon.

[6] Six were discharged: some were sailors whose previous application for demobilisation had been refused, the rest showed good reasons for ending their service on compassionate grounds.

[6] On the morning of Tuesday 8 April, at the shore base HMNZS Tasman, in Lyttelton, seven sailors refused duty and demanded a similar discharge to those at Philomel.

[23] Also that morning, the captain of the Castle-class minesweeper HMNZS Hautapu, which was at Timaru, was presented a letter by a party of sailors stating their dissatisfaction with the handling of lower-deck committees, and that they would not work until their issues were resolved.

[6] Reminding them of the punishment for mutiny and of the oath of allegiance sworn on joining the navy, Davis-Goff convinced six of the refusing sailors to return to duty.

[6] One of the Hautapu mutineers changed his mind and met the ship at Tasman, where trainees from the base's electrical school were added to the minesweeper's complement so she could sail for Philomel.

[3] Learning of the events in Devonport, the captain addressed the ship's company on 2 April on the need to maintain discipline and express concerns through proper channels.

[25] Personnel from the cruiser were concerned about how their colleagues had been treated, and during the afternoon, about 100 sailors assembled in Quay Street, Auckland, and decided to not return to duty.

[25] Demands in the letter included that pay rates be standardised across the armed forces, that service conditions improve and welfare committees be established, that personnel not be 'victimised' (punished) for joining the mutinies, and that the option to be discharged be offered.

[6] Instead of addressing the complaints, the Naval Board declared that any sailor who did not return to duty by the morning of Tuesday 29 April would be marked as Absent Without Leave.