THE STRIKE TRIALS

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1974, 3 February 1914, Page 8

THE STRIKE TRIALS

IN SUPREME COURT, CHARGES AGAINST 37 PERSONS. HIS HONOUR'S REMARKS. CONVICTIONS IN EACH CASE TAKEN. Cases arising out of the recent strike figured prominently at the criminal sessions or the Supreme Court, which began yesterday. The Chief Justice (Sir Kobert Stout) was on the Bench) and Mr. P. S. K. Macasscy appeared to prosecute on behalf of the' Crown. Mr. C. A. Bwen was chosen foreman of the Grand Jury.

In the course of his charge to the Grand Jury, His Honour said that no less than 49 persons would have charges brought against them. The majority of these, moreover, were very different from the ordinary criminal eases. No less than 14 were charged with having combined to disobey the lawful commands of the captain of a ship on the high seas. There were also 23 charged with various offences under the Crimes Act for assault, for rioting for threat* ening to murder, and for sedition. Thus there wore altogether 37 persons who were charged with offences that had arisen out of what had been called tho Labour troubles in our midst.

', The Opawa Men. So far as the 14 men who had jefused duty on board tho Opawa were concerned, our law placed persone. on board ships in a very different position from persons on land. If persons were. engaged to do certain work on board a ship, they were-not allowed to refuse duty at. sea when they pleased,- the reason being, of course, that rcfiisai to discharge their duties might endanger tho lives of people on tie ship, In tho case of the Opawa, the men had at first declined to do duty before the vessel went to sea. , They were brought before a Magistrate, and, at his direo tion, were placed on board again on thsj> eve of departure. When, however they were more than three miles out from lartd thoy had again refused duty. So far as the evidence which he had seen went,.there did not seem to have been any. reason for their conduct, except one, and that was' tha,t some portions of the cargo liad been put ..on board by men whom, they called "scabs." This was no excuse at all

• The Turbulent Time. There were other people charged in connection with these Labour troubles with rioting, with having been members of unlawful assemblies, : with assault, one man was charged with fifing a revolver at mounted police, and another with firing a. revolver and Woiinding a man grievously. There were also ohters charged with sedition. If an asse'mbly ,of people for any lawful o( unlawful purpose waa such as to stop traffio or anj-thing of that sort that- assembly p was at first called an unlawful assembly. - If there were in that 'assembly assault, firing of revolvers, throwing of detonators amongst horses, then the. assembly became a riot, and persons present were guilty of taking , part in a riot. Further, there was power under our law, as in the laws of all other countries, to/disperse rioters by reading the Riot Act. The authorities, however, seemed t<? have! treated ,;the' : ,.%JTmtter gently and lightly as compared'with what was done dn similar cases in ofcher_ oountrios. As to the firing, if a person fired a rerolvor in a crowd, even without.aiming it at anyone,, ho 'committed, an act which could not be tolerated in any civilised community. There was ono charge of snooting against Hassett, and another against Colclough. Ho understood that Colclcugh denied that ho waa the man and it would be the duty of the Grand Jury to say whether they belioved that Tho Charges of sedition. Another class of cases would bo those of persone--charged ' with what -was called sedition. The offence-.im a-iare-one in New' Zealand. There had been similar offences against Maoris in the days when, there were- troubles on the West Coast of this island., but so-, far as Europeans were concerned, the offenco was almost unknown here.,, The ehargo against these men was that of speaking seditious words, and seditious' words wero defined as being, worda expressing seditious intention. These tien were charged with having provoked the people to. murder, and to riot, and to get by unlawful means any redregs to which they thought they wero entitled. It was, of course, not wrong to en-* deavour to show that the Government might be mistaken or. wrong, or, to point out defects or errOfs in oar Con* stitution, or in the administration of. justice, or to incite'people- to put these' things right by lawful means, but if people urged other people to use unlaw* ful means, they came within the scope of our Crimes Act. Unless grievances ■were to bo redressed under .there must be violence, and 'violence, would breed violence. The result would .be that there would be no' such thing'as safety for person 'or property , -, , Our Labour Position Almost unique. Our position regarding labour troubles was almost unique, because a Court ha 4 been set up here specially to deal with them. That Court had far more ample powers than the Supreme Court of New Zealand, more ample powers thati almost any Court in the world, and there was no appeal against its dcoisKm. Labour was thus given the fullest opportunity to got redress of grievances in. a lawful way. : If an attempt was made ■to use violence there must follow a state of civil war and perhaps The Supreme Court had no power to inquire who was right and who .ttas wrong in the labour troubles, AH it had'to consider was "Bas bur law been violated?" And it should-be remembered that it was our own. law, made by-ourselves; it was not the law of any foreign country that had been tyrannously imposed Upon ug. His Honour then reviewed the prift* cipal points in tho evidence offered by tho Crown in the twelve other, eases, more usual in character, which would como before the Grand Jury.

TRUE BILLS. The Grand Jury returned true bills in respect to the ■ following charges against tlio following persons;:—Robert Hill, charge- of taking part in a riot: Patrick' Hassett, attempted murder mid taking part in • a riot; John _E4wft*d Harrington, participation in a riot'; Edward Colclough, taking part iii a riot, and attempting to do ...grievous bodily harm; John Troy, assaiilt, causing actual bodily harm; Walter Burton, taking part in a riot; Gharies P. Beaiimont, taking part in a riot;. Ahtqftio Stuparich, taking part in a_ riotj AJbort Anderson, takiug part in a riot; Alfred Jansen, AV(Uiam Parker, end Bojmrt Stephens, wilful damage; Max Wolfo, assault and obscoim language; William C. Tilloy and 13 others (Opaiysi firemen), combining to disaliey lawful commands at sea; William Birch, carnal knowledge; Carl Johnson, takiug part in an unlawful assembly; Georgo Johnston, taking part in an unlawful assembly; Alexander Church-man, tnkiug part in an unlawful assembly; William George Cockell, taking part in an unlawful assembly; Alfred Edmund Tomlmsnn, arson and theft (13 charges); Jean Millard, false preteflees; Sydney Ha,ll, assa-ult_ on a nialo; Elsio Reynolds, epening a postal ti-acket contrary to her dutyi.Tbaraas Acliud, Uh

Thomas Coffey, offence against a child; William Thomas Young,'uttering seditious words; Robert James Christopher Seal, wilful damage; Sarattol Thompson, taking part in a riot; Henry Holland, uttering seditions words; Ell&i Margaret Seymour, murder; .Frank Collins, tiioft from tho person; Edward Croft, theft; Edward Hunter, tittering seditious words; Charles Vivian Pμteous, theft; David Menzies, Alias Green, attempted offence against child; Bernard Smith, aline Haulston, attempted offence- against child.

! "MISLED BY FOOLS." LIGHT TEEM FOB, OPAWA'S MEN. The first prisoners presented for trial were the fourteen firemen .of the Opawa. Th«g' were charged witli having disobeyed the lawful commands of thts master of the ship on tho high seas on December 1. Their names were: Willism 0. Tilloy, Harry Sowo, John Haumert), Edward Sullivan, James Mulholklul, Anton Schlutz, Axell Hertigj William Wiltins, James jßarnett, John Barton, Harry Tetham> James Oh-adwiok, Alfred Stevens, David Gook. Mr. P; J. O'Regaii, who appeared for the prisoners, submitted that the offenco was not a serious offence of its class. Tho substantial offence, hed really been committed ashore when th«y refused to man the ship. The stesmeir had onlj been taken beyond tho threes mile limit ta fry the metal of the wen, and, as all except one still refused duty, it was impossible for the ship to proceed. After their arrest the men had remained nearly sis weeks in gaol before bail was found for'them. ■Eβ urged, also, that tho , fact that the men had committed the offence out of loyalty for thsir domra?des,. fobbed it of many of its worst features.

Mr. P. S. K. Macassey, for the Crown, said that ttip. gaoler at Welling* ton had informed , hisn that the cwhict of the men in prison had been, exemplary. Thri caso illustrated, lie eaid, the action of tiro strike loiid-ers. .-These fireffian had no interest in the strike at alls'haying shipped in England, but they had been misled aiid induced ..to. leave their toat tiftder a promise fTTat they would bfr protected and looked after. They had been brought before tiro Court, and bail was fixed at £10 per maul This bail was not forthcoming, and.the men were in gaol sis weeks be* fore the amount was reduced to £5. Ho quite believed that the- men had been led astray by the strike leaders, who liad used them for a selfish purpose. Hjs Honour said that he intended to deal very leniently with the accused, bqoauso, although they .had technically been• guilty, tliey had minimised their offence, by intimating before- tlie vessel left 'that they would not. work, He could not, however, dismiss fhera with' out som.o punishment, but ho would make it light, seeing that they had been six weeks in gaol. He hope'd that theincident would make the.men careful not to be misled by they had been nothing less than fools who liad put the accused in such trouble,' He would sentence ■ them to imprisonment for 14 days.

PLEAS Of GUIVTY. HIS HONOUR DKFEBS SENTENCE, Max Wolfe was charged that, or* November 17 lie assaulted.'Joseph K\h colloy, a special constable, go as to eattse actual bodily harm, and further that lie had used obscene language. Prisoner, for whom Sir. P. J. O'Kegan appeared, pleaded 'guilty.- His Honour deferred' passing sentence- ufltil ho could obtain a report as to the -nan's antecedents, ■ ■ ' ■■ Anderson, charged on two count-a with haviflg taken part ia a. .riot on November 17 and 18, also pleaded guilty. Ho was remanded 'for sentence. Mf. p'Regan appeared for the prisoner, Walter Burtin pleaded guilty to tho charge of having taken part in. a riot on , Jiovember 5 in Featherslon Street, and of having, assaulted certain special constables in the execution of their duty, Mr. 3P. 3, o ! R«gan appeared for the acetised v Burton was remand.ed for ; sentence, bail being allowed in feis bwn recognisance of £SO.. '. ' John Tfqy wne charged. with having o-n November 5 assaulted David William Fraser, so as to cause actual bodily harm. Mr. H. F, O'Leary, for thft prkgnor, tendered a plea of guilty to tiro eharge of cfimmori assault, one of the alternative eoijn.ts'in the indictment. This plea Mt. Macassey accepted oil beliall <if the Orowji. Acsiised W4s remanded for sentence, bail being allowed in tho nniount previously fixed by the.Magistrate. ' ■ Charles Frederick .ESeaumcrat, who was charged with taking part iri a riot on Ootober 30 p. leaded guilty. He was remantled until Saturday,- and admitted to bail oa his own'Tecogntsances. Mr/ K.J. O'Regan appeared[for the accused. •

P. & T, STORES RIOT. THE JUBY CONVICT STUPAiICH. Antonio Stupft-ricjh was charged with having taken part in a- riot in.Waterloo Quay on October 30, He pleaded not guilty, and Mr. P. <L O'Hegaii appeared to defend. " ■ ■ ■ . ■ Mr. Maeassoy outlined the incidents of tho riot w'hen a mob rushed a party of special constables at th<s Post and 'J'elegraph Stares.. Servant M'Glone described the attack or some hundreds Of rioters on the special men. ■ Accused, was .standing near. AVhen ho was h'rst observed ho had a large stono in either hand'i and when the constables rode awajf h:o picked up .a rail and ran after them.' Throughout tho riot the mob threw stones and sticks at th© constables, shouting "Look at the 6081)3." "Let'e get at them," and a few said "Kill them." Hβ had. also seen at least fettf men with revolvers. . , To Mr. O'Eegan: He did not actually see accused throw stones, but he had no do/übt that he had seen him with stones in his hands. 'Hβ was certain, also that Stuparich was the man whom he had seeiij because' he had been specially pointed out to him by Constable Ferguson. Constable- Ferguson also identified the accused, whom E& had known, for over three y*arS) as the' man whom he had, efeen. in tho crowd with stones! in his haiids. . Nonstable Fallen gave general evi* denee about tho rtot. •_ ■ Caiistalik Bolcliei - said;lie had been on duty at the Manners Streist station, oil November 5, when tho- accused was brought in. He asked accused what ho had been doing thero, aftd accused replied: "I am very unlucky. You picked me out of all my metes. They ran, and I ran with them." Mr. -Q'Hegaij then put accused in the bos. Stnparioh'j in evidence, said that ho liad -been in the crowd in Waterloo Quay en the data referred to, but he. had not Seen any missiles thrown, and he had not oven seen tlie qwoials. Ho had no stones in his possession, aior had he thrown any. His Honour said that accu&ed had ad- : mttied being in a crowd, which, if the evidence of tho constables was to lie heiieyed* was, breaking the- public pea.ee-. Had; the accused taken part hi the riot P Even according to his own statement ho had run with 'his ftiates : yko were rioting. If he had dona that h<: was taking part in a riot. There was also evidence fltat ho had had stones in his hands. If so, for what purpose did ho intend to use tlicinf Not for self-defence, because lie had no need-to he there. If the evU deuce of the constable and tlm sergeant that ho had stones in his hands was accepted, then it was clear that accused had taken part in. the riot. .»' The jury "returned , a verdiet of guilty after a' retirement -of otte hour. Prisoner was for jeateace )intjl fi : %fomdfiT;i '.'*■•