The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 1915. REDRESSING A WRONG

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2411, 17 March 1915, Page 4

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 1915. REDRESSING A WRONG

The action of His Excellency the Govehnoe in reducing the sentence passed upon 'F. E. N. Gaudin for breach of regulations which had been put into force by the military authorities at Samoa will meet with general approval. The reduction of the term of imprisonment from fivo years to six months' hard labour from the date of Gaudin's conviction at Apia shows that His Excellency has taken a fair and reasonable view of all the circumstances. By evading the military censorship which had neon quite properly established when the New Zealand troops took possession of Samoa, Gaudin undoubtedly committed an offence that was deserving of punishment, but the severity of the sentence imposed was out of all proportion to the nature of tho wrong done. Technically, the charges brought against tho accused came under the.comprehensive description of "war treason," and this at first sight invested the case with an appearance of greater seriousness than it really possessed. The vast majority of the people of New Zealand are strongly of opinion that in a tremendous crisis such as that through which the Empire is now passing any conduct of a really treasonable character—any action that would help the enemy in waging ■ war against us—ought to be punished with unflinching rigour. Leniency in such a matter might have disastrous consequences. But there is a world of difference between a firm determination to suppress and punish treason and the indiscriminate imposition of extreme penalties without making due allowance for tho character of the offences committed. Tho action of Gaudin in violating military regulations in enemy territory occupied by British troops cannot be regarded as a trifling matter, and it certainly deserved to be adequately punished, but a sentence of five years' imprisonment is altogether repugnant to British ideas of justice and fair play,. , When the full details of the case became known the public was astonished at what seemed_ to be a strange and unaccountable indifference on tho part of the Military Court to the gencrally-accepted principle that punishment should, as far as possible, be made to "fit tho crime." The authorities at Samoa appear to have been suffering from something approaching a sense of panic, and to have magnified _ the gravity of Gaudin's conduct in most extraordinary manner. This we fear is not the only instance in which the authorities in Samoa have exercised their powers in a harsh manner, repugnant to our sense of justice and calling for investigation. Great powers are properly conferred on a Military Governor in time of war; but the greater the power the greater the responsibility. He can practically make any rules and regulations he may think fit. _ An extraordinary position may justify extraordinary measures; but military authorities arc not entirely irresponsible, and in due course thoso responsible for the administration of Samoa since it has been captured froml the Germans will no doubt be required to give an account of their stewardship. In the meantime it is satisfactory to know that there is at least some check on their actions through the powers held by His Excellency the Governor. The facts in the Gaudin case were admitted, and the jurisdiction of the Court which imposed Mk fcntenc" wns unnswnlnblc, .Gaums undoubtedly tendered him-.

self liable to punishment, and if the sentence had been a fair and reasonable one very little more would have been heard of the matter. It was the savagery of the penalty that aroused public sympathy with the offender. People felt that a wrong had been done, and a movement was set on foot to right it. The facts uf the case justify the statement of the chairman of tho public meeting held in Auckland that Gaudin did not intend to injure his country or benefit the_ enemy. It is admitted that he failed to observe certain regulations, but it is_ contended that his offence did not involve any risk to life or property. It has been suggested that a fine would have met the case. That appears to have been the view of the Auckland public meeting. It would, however, be a mistake to allow the impression to get abroad i that any rules that the civil or military authorities may think it necessary to enforce for the safety of the Empire, or any part of it, in time of war may be Broken with impunity. In reducing Gaudin's sentence to six months' hard labour, His Excellency the Governor has mitigated an excessive penalty without giving the idea that disobedience to military law is a more or less trifling offence.