THE CRAMPTON CASE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 119, 13 February 1919, Page 6

THE CRAMPTON CASE

ILL-TREATMENT OF PRISONERS

ALLEGED

COURT-MARTIAL RESUMES

By Telegraph—Press Association.

Wanganui, February 12,

The court-martial set up- to try Lieutenant Crampton on charges of ill-treat-ment of prisoners at the Wanganui detention barracks, re&umed its sittings today. Lieutenant-Colonel Colquohoun" presided, Captain Hudson acting as prosecutor, and Captain Baldwin as Judge Advocate. Lieutenant Crampton was represented by Mr. C. A. Loughnau (Palmers.ton North), and Mr. N. F. Armstrong

(Wanganui). A considerable number of interested spectators was present.

The Judge Advocate pointed out the possibility of mi objection to the constitution of the Court in that it was not properly constituted according to the King's regulations, biiit said that accused's counsel had agreed to waive any informalities that might be involved, as Crampton was anxious that the trial be proceeded withi . The first charge was one of ill-treat-ment of Private Harry Wilson in grabbing him by the neck while two n.c.o.'s placed a military pack 'on him. Accused pleaded not guilty. Addressing the Court, the prosecutor emphasised (hat soldiers undergoing detention were not prisoners, and should

not l>e called on. Mr. Loughnan said that Crnmptou's principal witness was still ill in hospital, this king one of the grounds for the adjournment. It was impossible to conduct tin; defence without Sergeant Smith, and counsel suggested that under the circumstances the Court • might consent to a- further adjournment. The Court decided to proceed as far as possible. The prosecutor, outlining the ease, said*' that Crampton introduced a system of punishment at the barracks contrary to

the regulations. His powers were to order punishment by close confinement, for a period of not more than three days,

diet punishment for not more than threo days, deprivation of mattress for the same period, and forfeiture of remission of sentence for a period not exceeding fourteen days. He asked that the charge be altered irom "grabbing by the neck"

(o "grabbing by the hair- of the head;" The president said the Court had no power to amend the charge, but if this was proved in evidence it could give a special finding.. . Private Harry Wilson gave evidence that he was in the detention barracks from about April '28, 1918. On arrival the' roll was called, nnd Crnmpton addressed the men to the effect that if they would carry on they would have a good lime, but that if they did not; they would have a "damn bad time." Witness said he was put in the refractory cell after being searched. Crampton, with Sergeant Smith and Corporal Parmenter, came into the cell, and, following witness's repealed refusal to address nil officer as "Sir," Crampton ordered him three days' bread and water, remarking "We tame lions here." After three days in the refractory cell witness was ordered two hours' pack drill. * He had no uniform, so one was found for him, but lie refused it on. He was then stripped and the uniform was put on him. He had no chance of resisting, as Smith hcid his arms, and ho was forcibly undressed and forcibly dressed in the uniform.

Tlie witness also stated that when he got to the barracks a rifle was put on his shoulder, and he was ordered to march. He was sauntering along in his own way when he was warned by Crampton that, if. he did not do the regulation step he would have to double. Witness neither increased his pace nor doubled. Crampton ordered Lance-Corporal Walker to help witness along, which he did by pushes and punches that did not hurt, as they were mostly on his back. At tho end of an hour witness was ordered back to the coll. Cramp'ton spoke to him, witness not replying. Crampton tried to get an answer, and failing in this ordered witness an extra hour pack drill. When he was ordered to put on the pack he refused. Crampton grabbed Win-by tho hair with both hands and pushed him forward, while two men put on the pack. To Mr. Loughnan: Witness was not sen•teuced to detention for insolence or insubordination, but for disobeying a lawful command. He was a conscientious objector, and was unable to carry out orders of a military nature. Ho did not recognise Crampton as a superior officer. Witness did not consider himself a soldier, but a civilian. Crampton, in his dealings with witness, did not displav personal animus against him. He reasoned amicably with him in the cell, advised him to observe (he regulations, nnd offered to remit a portion of his sentence of three days' solitary confinement if he conformed. When wituess conformed he had no complaints to make about Crampton's treatment Vo Imnccossary force was used agaiust witness when S. ram Jm on £i Vns l )l ' Gsent '- Witness wrote to the Truth" newspaper a letter complaining of the treatment at the bar. .racks. It was signed by eight men. He did not know that some denied signing it. AVitness wrote under the verbaf instructions of the eight men. Three signed, and witness had the consent of the others. The names were Moynohan, Casev. Bell Beaton, ,Fitzputrick, Halkett, Boyle, and witness.''

JTr. Loughnan produced a document which was purported to be signed by Fitzpatrick. Boyle, and Moynohan, denyJ!t 4i » t,,py s ' Rl,e(l tho I(, rt er *» Truth He also produced documents signed by Casey and Bell, admitting that they placed their names on blank paper and denying that they signed the letter to Ir.ith." Witness's objections to military service were not on religious grounds. B

AVitness said he was positive that his hair was pulled when the nack was put on. He was absolutely certain that Onmpton pulled -it. Further cross-examined, AVilsnn flirt it was true that the letter to "Truth" was signed by eight men in that it was signcd by consent" of the eight men. He pote the letter in order to cail public attention to what was going on at the barracks.

i j i' 1 ! C , om ' l: w,,e " "Ac was handed to him, it was olaced on his shoulder, but not strapped. Donald Kerr Porter, who was quarter-master-sergeant at the barracks, eaid that AVikon was in witness's office on n VDrn "ipsions. »s "the pack was kept there, the pack was a very heavy one. When men were awarded pack drill they same in for it. On one occasion accused and _ Sergeant Smith brought Wilson in. Wilson was knocked about until he put it on. Accused then caught Wilson by the hair, and shook his head. He then ordered Wilson's hair to be cut oil'. This was eventually done. AVitness also remembered, that accused caught AVilson by the neck and pushed his head down. I us was after the pack was on. Accused and Sergeant Smith were veiling and bawling continuously at the'man. It was mostly bad language. AVilson said nothing at all.

lo Mr. Loughnan: He was quite positive accused seized Wilson bv the neck, ami pushed him to the ground. Witness considered'that great violence was used. He could, see no reason for violence. Wilson was shaken»as if he were a doc

lo the Court: Wilson hod the pack on when accused caught him by the hair. Accused, James William Crampton, s ?"k ,! lc smed '» the Main Body at Gallipoh. He was wounded and invahded hack. He then served at hnmoa. and on returning to New Zealand was promoted to be officer commanding the Detention Barracks at Wamio ,Ul, tt Ho took c,mr K e iri March, UlB. He received verbal instructions troiii Headquarters that no conscientious electors would to Wimgiuiui txiiracks-onl.v shirkers; men wlio had been dealt with by military service hoards either on religious or other grounds. Witness claimed that it was ins duty to see that' the men carried wit _ their duties, -and in the interests of obedience and discipline to indict such piimshmont as the case warranted. He .claimed that he had a right to use what lorco was necessary when a man obstinately refused to do his duty. In tho ease of Wilson, in addition to refusing to coll witness "sir," he showed dumb insolence. On April 22, 1918, witness gave Wilson three days' solitary confinement on bread and and ordered him to be doprived of his mat-

tress. Witness spent three-qunrters i of an hour with Wilson in the cell, trying to Ret him to take the right path. After Wilson had done solitary confinement, witness asked him if he had any complaints. Wilson replied: "No; no complaints." Wilson also said he was not going to "sir" any man. Witness replied: "You will 'sir' me before I am finished with you." Witness described how Sergeant Smith and Corporal Parmenter tried to get Wilson to put his pack on. Sergeant Smith showed him, but Wilson refused. Witness then ordered that it he put on for him. Wilsou offered n sulky resistance. After that lie addressed witness as "sir," and there was no further trouble. There was no truth in the statement that witness seized Wilson by the hair. He did not touch th» man in any way. Witness gave an al>solute denial to Porter's evidence. After' "Wilson went, witness heard of a letter in "Truth," but as it was an irregular proceeding he did not take notice of it at . the. time. Then a-communication came from Headquarters giving the names of eight men who, it was alleged, had signed it. Witness then made inquiries, and tho men voluntarily signed a document (produced) denying cruelty or that they signed a letter to "Truth." Two of the men said that all they did was to sign a blank paper. Witness did not offer any inducement to the men to sign the document he mentioned.

Captain Hudson: You said that no religious objectors would be sent to Wanganui?

Witness: That is the information I got. Then you and the people who gave you the information would be surprised to hear that there were bona-fide religious objectors at tho barracks at the lime?— 'Some of them might have put forward religious grounds after they came to Wanganui." , ■ Did Porter remonstrate with you in any way?—" No."

]n reply to another question, witness said that he only put his hands on Wilson for the purpose of Adjusting the pack.

Tlie_ court-martial will be resumed at 10 o'clock to-morrow morning.