ROWDY ELECTION MEETINGS

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 74, 20 December 1919, Page 8

ROWDY ELECTION MEETINGS

FURTHER PROSECUTIONS THREE DISTURBERS PUNISHED

Further cas<s arising out of the in- , lerrunted political meetings 'conducted by the-Liberal candidate for the Wellington Central seat, Mr. F. Pirani, were heard beforo Mr. H. L. Hollini,'s, S.M., at tho I Magistrate's Court yesterday. The prosecutions related to the candidate's meeting in the Town Hall on Friday (if last week. The first case dealt with was that of Frederick Chance, who was charged with disturbing the liuelin;:. The prosecution was conducted- by Sublispector Emerson, and Mr. A. 13'. Siovwright appeared for tho defendant. Constable Scarry stated that, notwithstanding ii warning, defendant pws.nted in interrupting the candidate. Following this, lie was ejected and gave a falso name, but witness 'discovered a cluo to his identity. Mr. Pirani gave evidence regarding tho attitude of a. section of his 'audi'once, and counsel for defendant subjected him to a lengthy cross-examination, which provided considerable entertainment for those in the Court. Mr. Sievwright: Do you.know thai this man particularly was interjecting?— "I do." flow do you know that?—" The interruptions came from his quarter of tho hall and, later, I saw him rise at tho request of the constable." Mow many people were there there.?— "About 1000." Do you mean to say that you could Bwcar to any one. of those 4000 by th« tone of his voice?—"l do not need b> swear, for I am on my oath, and 1 ivsped my oath. You can ask an is-, nc-rant person to swear again; but you cannot ask me. (Laughter.) Of course, 1 know that this man interjected, and you know it too —(laughter)—lie probably told you so himself." (Renewal laughter, promptly quelled by the Court orderly's cry, "Silence!") The defendant then told his story and said that he took offence at a remark I by the candidate to the effect that everyone who was opposed to him was either ;\ "Bed Fed." or n disloyalist. Mr. Pirani was recalled, and denied ■ that he had classed all his opponents cither as disloyalists or "Red Feds." Tho disturbers of tho meeting belonged to either category. Witneae had sufficient common-sense to judgy by. a man's attitude and his manner of interjecting to decide whether , he was dU: loyal or not. Counsel: This man swears that you did class your opponents as disloyalists and "Red Feds.'"—"l don't mind. Ho was too excited to know what he was saying. I was not." 1 Have,you not been a frequent interjector at various public meetings ?—"I have never interjected at any public meeting in my life, and that is about, twice as long «s you have lived." (Laughter.) Counsel continued to question tho wit.ne'ss as to interjections in t'ho House, and Mr. Pirani replied by informing Mr. Sievwright that he was only wasting his own time, al» that of the Court, by asking such questions. . . "Yes,.nnd you wasted your time during the last three months," retorted counsel. To this the witness replied: "I thank you. This is no doubt the sort, of courtesy one m'ight expect from cwlain of Wellington's younger lawyers." Mr. Sievwright proceeded to address the Bench on tho defendant's military record, when Mr. Rollings remarked: "Yon are not addressing a jury—you are addressing me." When counsel concluded the Magistrato confessed that he did not understand the defence. First of all counsel had said that it was a case of mistaken identity and he had then endeavoured h> justify certain interruptions which tho defendant had admitted. However, Hie Worship intimated that those who attended political nieetii.gs should cither give (Ihe candidate a fair hearing, or leave tho hall ami hold a mcpting elfiewhore to air their views. Defendant would bo fined .61 and costs ,_ The second case was that of William' Mallard, who had previously been fined £',} for disturbing another .meeting hold by Mr. Piiuni. ' . • The defendant admitted interjecting, hut; endeavoured to justify his action' by claiming a right to give expression to •his opinions, and to tell Mr. Pirani that hie statement that "therc.was likely to be a hi-; strike in January-' was false. The defendant whs fined £j and costs. A fine of .£1 and costs was imposed on Cecil Trask, a recent arrival from England. Mr. 11. F. O'Learv. who appeared for the defendant, eaid that, lip did not propose to waste the lime of the Court by saying that his client did not interrupt the meeting.