ANTI-CONSCRIPTION

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2976, 13 January 1917, Page 11

ANTI-CONSCRIPTION

r-*— : . STREET ORATORS IN TROUBLE. SEVERAL CHARGES AND CONVICTIONS SPEECH-MAKING IN COURT Before Mr. S. E. M'Cartliy, S.M., ii the Magistrate's Court yesterday, the case was resumed in which Kevin Byrno was charged on three informations with having caused crowds to congregate in the'stveet, thereby, obstructing the traffic. -. The evidence for tho prosecdtion having been concluded in respect of a charge arising out of a meeting held in Clyde Quay on the afternoon of December 31, the police proceeded with the second charge, which had reference to a meeting in Dixon Street on the ' ovening of tne same day.. Inspector Hendrey prosecuted. The defendant was not represented by coun- . sel. Senior-Sergeant AVillis stated that about 6.55 p.m. the defendant announced a. misting under the auspices of the Anti-Conscription' League, and introduced three speakers. The defendant later addressed the meeting himself. Four or five hundred people congregated, completely blocking the road and the footpath. - Tho meeting concluded about 7.40 p.m. Defendant as Cross-Examiner. The defendant proceeded to cross-ex-amine the sergeant: Defendant: Have you ever been at meetings held at that place by tho Salvatiou Army ? "I have seen Salvation Army meetings there." Defendant: What was tho condition of. the streets then as regards being blocked?—" The traffic" was impeded a good deal." Defendant: Is it not correct to say that when . anybody holds meetings there on Sundays the street and side- ■ walk are blocked? —"Yes, to a certain extent." . Defendant: I presume, Sergeant, that at times you walk up and down Willis Street. Have, you ever observed the crowd of people outside the "Evening Post" Office?—" Yes; we frequently have trouble there, and have . to move them on." • ... Defendant: HaVe you ever arrested tho proprietor'of tho "Evening Post"? -"No." Defendant: Havo you ever arrested any of the Salvation Army or City Mission bands for blocking tho traffic in Dixon Street, or. have you known of nny of them being arrested?—" No." Defendant: This was an orderly meeting?—" Yes." Defendant: Thero did not appear to •bo any prospect of a riot?—"No; but wo know _ that at other anti-conscrip-tion meetings thero has been troublo." Defendant: You did not think it necessary to request the people to tho sidewalk?—"l did not do BO." Evidence by Sergeant Fitzpatrick followed. Tho defendant's cross-examina-tion was very much on the lines of that given above. Detective-Sergeant'Lewis stated that the street had been clear before the meeting commenced. The third and last oharge against Byrne referred to a mooting hold in Dixon Street on the ovening of December 24.... • Evidenco . as to obstruction. of tho traffic was given by tho police as before. . . ... . , . ; I Constablo Hall stated that the defendant,,when asked whether ho had a peruiit,..rei>lied'iu the ■negative,"admit- • ting at tbo same time a knowledge of the, fact that under the by-laws a permit was required. I i Addresses the Court. Byrne proceeded to address tho Court. He submitted that it had not been proved that tho traffio was. impeded. What evidence there was to show that there might havo been a stoppage also showed that it was duo to the fact that tho polico did not • move the crowd on. Tho polico had admitted that the meeting was quite orderly, and thero was ho reason to believe a riot would havo ensued if an attempt had been made to move tho peoplo on. Ho nnd his friends had not been desirous of coutravoning the bylaws, hilt they had exhausted tho other possibilities of tho caso. They had written to tho Town Clerk and had also waited upon the City Council with the object of obtaining permits to hold their meetings, but their requests had been refused on tho ground that a breach of the peace might be caused. The Commissioner of Police had also refused his permission.- The _ whole position, as far as Byrne saw it, was

that he had been singled out for son sort of' peculiar treatment not give to others in this matter. Ho unde: stood that it was nob customary t arrest a man for tho offenco with whic he was. charged. Ho know the polic Vera within the law in making an ai rest, but considered that such a pr< cedure was "a'littlo over the odds. Concluding, Byrno said he had give the matter of holding meetings withou a permit due consideration, and, bew; honestly convinced that bo was right had "put his hand to the plough," am felt that he could not turn back. Inspeotor Hendrey quoted cases bear ing on tho charges. n A Serious and Deliberate Offenoe. io His .Worship, in delivering his judg n inent, said: —"This olieneo is mon ,- serious than ■ appears on . tho surfaco - Looking at it in a superficial manner it is simply a breach of tho: by-law bj causing an obstruction, to traffic; but •. in this particular case the facts and i the admissions of tho defendant show i that application was mado to the local - authority for a license, which was' rei fused, and that the'defendant, with the a knowledge of that refusal, still held the e meetings.'The local authority was acting well within rights and well within 3 its discretion in refusing tho applica- . tio'n for permission to hold the meetings. Experience in other parts has b shown that these meetings have a - tendency to lead to riots and disturb--5 ances. There may bo persons on the - street who have relatives at the front, 6 and they arc apt to 1 resent gatherings . of this sort. Riots have ensued. Now, . tho defendant, well knowing that he I was committing a breach of tho law, [ elected to hold these' meetings. In so doing ho was committing an act which in itself is a negation of _ the principle upon which democratic institutions stand. He has denied the right of the majority to rule, and this . class of offence, especially at'a time [ like the present, has to be viewed seriously. I shall view it seriously, because tho Courts cannot recognise on the part of any individual or any sec- ' tion of tho community a right to set at ' defiance, the law of tho land." Byrne was convicted on olio charge, . as the police did not press for con- , victions on the remaining two. Ho ' said he had no money and no property. In default of immediate, payment, he was ordered to be sent to gaol for two months: . , Other Individuals Convioted. Two charges similar .to those ou which Byrne was convicted were preferred against John ' Loughran, who had delivered addresses in Dixon Street on December' 24 and Clyde Quay on December 31. The police evidence on the first charge was very similar to that given in. Byrne's case. By consent of Inspector Hendroy, the dsfendant was permitted to profit by whatever points Byrne had made in his defence. When the evidence on the first cbargo had beerf heard the defendant was convicted, and tbo second charge was withdrawn. A fine of £10, with tho alternative of two months' imprisonment, was inflicted. Loughran said he had 110 means of paying the fine. Further charges under the by-law infringed by the last two defendants were preferred against William Parker, •John "Patrick Rea, and Gerald Dee. Parker and Rea both pleaded guilty, with the proviso that they should bo allowed to address tho Court. Parker dolivered a rambling political oration and mado reference to allegedly unfair treatment received by liiiu from the Court on a previous occasion. In the course of his speecli ho said to His Worship: '!I havo just como hero to get tho gruel you nro in a position to hand out to mo. Of course, as a servant of the Stale 3'ou ha,vo to do as you arc told." Tile Magistrate replied that ho was thtjrjc..Jo'dp, right, to all manner of poo- , .p|c, ,',^|id. l liad ..no instructions except tlie law of tho land. When convicted and ordered to pay a fine of £10 or go to gaol for two months, Parker said ho had no property, and in any caso did not wish to pay tbo lino. "If anyone were to pay this fine for me," ho concluded, "I should consider him an enemy of mine." , ■ ' Rea harangued tho Court from what he termed tlie point of view of an Irishman. He also was convicted and fined £10. The amount was forthcoming: ' Dec pleaded not guilty. After hearing tho police evidence and an address by tho defendant, tho Magistrate asked tho latter whether lie. was willing to givo an undertaking not to speak or assist at such meetings in future. "I don't tako any pleasure in fining follow citizens, but I've get lo do my duty," remarked His Worship. The defendant said ho would undertake not to speak at tlie meetings again. He was convicted, and ordered to come up for sentence, when called upon. The Magistrate said that ho did not consider Dee to bo in the saano category as tho other men.