ALLEGED SEDITIOUS UTTERANCE

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3022, 8 March 1917, Page 7

ALLEGED SEDITIOUS UTTERANCE

SEQUJEL TO FREKZING WORKS STRIKE. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Auckland, March 7. In tlio Hamilton Police Court today, before Mr. Kawson, S.M., Micbael Francis Cussvok, of Auckland, labourer, was charged that on February 15 ho did publish seditious utterance in a spoecJi to certain inen employed at tho Horotiu Freezing Works, inciting them to strike, which utterance was seditious, in that it bad a tendency to interfere with tho supply of frozen meat required for purposes in connection with the present war, contrary to the War peculations Act. Mr. Alacassoy, Crown Prosecutor, prosecuted. Tlio caso was tho first of the kind, and \it lasted all day. Mr. Macassey said the Government was absolutely dotermined not to allow men to cause strikes to delay tho shipment of frozen meat and otlior necessaries for tho troops at tho front. Cusack had been employed at Southdown, and .wont to Horotiu on February 14.. There was .no grioyance on tho part of tho men there, and no complaint had been made to the management, but there was a strike at Westfiold and Southdown. Defendant entered the works without the permission of tho manager, and addressed the chamber hands, with tho result that they went ou strike. At the time nearly 1,500,0001b. of frozen meat was awaiting shipment for the troops. In tho clauso under which the proceedings wcro taken seditious • utterance was defined as "seditious intention, or having a seditious tendency." Tho penalty was a fine of £100 or 12 months' imprisonment. Cusaok went to the wor.ks on February 14, after which Mr. Robertson, the manager, was informed that the mon had held a meeting, and were going on strike in sympathy with the. men on strike in Auckland, but they wero in the dark as to what they wanted. They agreed to work to tho morning of February 16. Nineteen men went out, 100 being affected. Evidence was given ■for tho prosecution on,the lines of Mr. Ma-cassoy's address. The defence was a denial that Cusack had in any way induced or incited tho men to strike. Decision was reserved until Saturday. Bnil was allowed in accused's own recognisance.