NEWSPAPER EXONERATED

Chronicle (Levin), 13 March 1948, Page 4

NEWSPAPER EXONERATED

tfress Assoc.ija.tion>

Magistrate Says ProsecutSon Ridiculoiis :

(Per

WELLINGTON, March 12. , : . "I think it would he a strange i a thing indeed if newspapers were restricted in giving what I think is a ] fair report on the news of this husi- ' : ness, or restricted in the proper, free expression of their opinion," said" Mr. A. M. Goulding, S.M., in the ' : Magistrate 's Court to-day when dismissing charges of inciting " and encouraging a strike„ hrought against Blundell Brothers, Ltd., and against the publishers of The Evening Post, Henry Percy Fahian Biuhdeli, Leonard Coker Blundell, and Ernest Ak hert Blundell. The charges were hrought , bv the Inspector of Factories as the result oi an artiele headed " Coinpulsory ' JMeeting, " dealing with the holding of a stop - work meeting of tlie eity and Hntt, branches of thg .Wellington Carpenters' / and Joiners' Union appearing in The Post, on February 1(5'. , Most of the argument. in the Court centred around the heading and the opeuing phrasesj "It will be -coinpulsory for the* members of the city and Hntt branches of the Wellington Carpenters' and Joiners' Union to attend the special stop-work- meeting to-mor-row. ..." . Mr. . W. K. Birks proseeuted,. anc.1 Mr. H, R. C. Wild appeared for Blundell Bros., and for the publishers. "The Post is- quite properly. putting before the' publie its viewpoint, and the Government viewpoint, and tne employers' viewpoint, and I believe the employees' viewpoint of the whole situation," said the Magistrate. "I don't think it is proper for a prosecution of this type to seiect A small sentence such as has been selected as the basis of thes'e chargesand nqt look into the text in which it oecurs and then say that sentence is very indelinite, that-it is an incitement •or encouragement to the men to striice and to attend this stop-work meeting. ' ' It was known that there had l)een a decision to' stop work, and the mem--bers of the union had rOceived circulars in which it was intimated thav attendance of every member was denianded. It was known that the attitude of the Government was opposea to the meeting; the newspaper reported the Government 's nation ana the Government 's attitude over the matter, following it almost iromediately below with publieation of tne statement complained of. It was. iinpossible to read the heao line, separate it from the res.t of tne .artiele and'sav that. the Words nSed w.oulfl incite and urge, thp_ to att,end th,e pieetjing, .said . Mr. Goulding. good deal of other informa, tio n •was eonfained below that. • On jCopiparing,. . the .rpport !(in, the Evpning. Post wjth .that ;in (the (Rotltnprn Cross o,n ,tlig .f'ollowing .mprning, it was. ipipossible; or ri^icu]ops- to suggest; that any carpenfer ioy any. other men - r.eailing the whatu of t)ie . news of tn.e building trouble woulc\ conclude that The Post or the Goutliern Cross hyere 'inci'ting or ufgi'hg' "the" nilfif to affe"hd the meeting or doing anything whica would in any wav compel the, .men to dfe so. 'uk. .: "That is mjn view^n reading .tne artiele, prosecution has failed to esfabixsh^that this artiele was an incitement," said Mr. Goulding. . The Evidence. /Thomas George Piekler, Inspector oi' Factories, said there was no provision in- the awanl covering the earpenterc and joiners of the Wellington district for holding of stopwork meetings during the hours of employment. Witness said he did not lciiow of any particular member of the. union who attended meetings and knew of nobody who' went in consequence of the artiele in th« Post. Witmess agreed that the reporl did not contain any xeference to the time at Avhich tlie meeting was to be held or the particular place at which it was to be held. • • Witnegs said he was the offieer of t.he department who decided jvhethei'-or not iuformatioiis would be laid undei regulations. That applied only up to o point. In matters Of national interest they were referred to- the head o-fficer hlr. 11. It. C. Wild (appearing for tlu Pos.t) : Did you deC-id& ynurself in this particular matter? Witness: Not It was decided by tlu lieadoilice. Mr. Wild produced the Southem Cross on February 17, and drew witness 's attention'to a paragraph headed "Carpenters to meet today," and to a senteuce iu the paragraph: "Attendance* will he compulsory." Witr - ness agreed there was no difference hetween the sentence in the Southern Cross and one comnlained of in the Post excepting the wording. Mr. Wild: Has any information bCen laid against the publishers of the Southern Cross? Witness: Not to my knowledge. Mr. Wild: Have you laid one? Witness: No. "The Southern Cross may still . have something in .store for itself," said the Magistrate with a smile. Detective N. .J.'McPhee gave evi. dence. of bcing outside the theatre al which '"the union .meeting rvas held Memliers rvcre admiffed on the produc* Jipn of union cards. Ile understoodIhat circulors refemng to the meeting had been circulated to substantially all the members. • Mi'. Wild: Did you see anybody going to the meeting carrying a copy of the Evening Post? Witness: No. The Magistrate (Mr. Goulding): 0 anv other offensi've weapon ? (Laughter). Mr. Wild: T was going toTrsk aboill the Southern Cross! Tn the, case for the defenc-e, Mr. Wild said he was going to refer hriefly to three. matters of great concern to de fendants, and indeed to the publie First, was the deep concern of defend ants that in'any publieation for which Ihey were responsible they should be thought eitlier unknowingly or unwittingly to have brokcn the 1 aw ;' seeond, was. the astonishment and amazement

of defend ants, which should be shared by publie, that the informant or any one else should inferpret, ? o*r ask the Court to interpret 3a news item in flie ■ Post, as inciting p"r ' encguraging' the br6aking of thc law'or as being in any way sympathetic to. the cause of those .viio had broke thCiaW. "It is indeed a truly Gilbertian situation that the Post because of its endeavom- to give the publie iull news of what had been happening in this matter should now find itself proseeuted for the very offence that it has so streniiously endeavoured to denounce and suppress. It is contrary to commonsense that a newspaper whose opposition to industrial unrest " has so constantly been made plain should be charged with inciting and encouraging a strike, and I submit that 011 the grounds of commonsense alone these charges must fail." Ile would express the alarm defend•lnts and tlie general publie would feel that a neivspaper which in his submis•;ion had done nothing niore than earry out its proper and traditional function of giving the publie news from everv point of view on a matter of mo'U; urgent publie interest should now be before the Court. "This prosecution in my submission strikes at tlie very i'oundations o.f the freedoin of tho press, " he said. Tlie Magistrate (Mr. Goulding) then (intimated that lie liad reached the conclusion that the prosec-utions must fail. It seemed that no.reasonable man could look upon the artiele as being an ineite•iient or encouragement to stop work. Mr. Birks" said he must agree that lie bad failed on 'the charges of inciting, but he maintained^that on the charges of encouraging tlie strike the situation ■was different. A newspaper must be oresumed to intend the natural and orobable consenuences of its" acts in tmblishing a sratement. Even from a teehnieal view alone, said A f r. Goulding, he thought the prose-c-utions must fail for the reasons ad-v-anced by Mr. Wild that no incitement had proved to be effective on any earpenter and no encouragement had been proved to be effective on any earpenter. ' The charges were then dismissed.