GALBRAITH'S CASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 12 July 1922, Page 1

GALBRAITH'S CASE.

FINED FOll SPEECH

Lby TELEGRAPH—PER PRESS ASSOCIATION]

WELLINGTON, July II At the Police Court to-day, ill the case againkt Alexander Galbraith, who was charged with inciting violence in an address entitled “The Downfall of Capitalism,” at the Communist Hail. The charge was the sequel to a speech on June 4th last. Mr Maoassey, for the prosecution, said that tho proceedings were taken under Section 2 of the Police Offenders Act, the penalty under which was three months’ imprisonment or a fine of £IOO. The address was delivered by defendant before fifty or sixty people. Detective Sergeant Lewis and Constable Watts were present at the meeting and made notes. The- Crown relied on defendant’s attack on capitalism and his advocacy of force, .as would bo shown by the evidence adduced.

Detective Lewis gave evidence as to what defendant said.

Galbraith had said that the workers could not he expected to draw a straight line and walk it like a tightro]>o. Force was necessary and that was the only way n change eonld bo brought about. The workers won offered the bnttot box next. What good was that? Religion was the enemy of the workers. Parsons talked of the brotherhood of men, but all that was rot. Peaceful methods wore no good at all. As was said of the Paris Commune, ‘We must break, shake and burst the whole system." Referring to Russia, Galbraith said that they had not stuck to constitutional methods there. They got what they wanted. The capitalist class there had been corrupted and they would have to corrupt them here before they could succeed. The minister here, Galbraith had Continued, had granted permission for the workers to say anything provided they did not advocate violence. That was no use. and the only remedy they had was to go to the luillot box and put in a party that might be termed the excretion of the working class. lie said that it was not likely that the capitalists were going to say: “Aon take it. I've had a good time,” and thou hand it over. Recently a friend of his had been speaking to him about what could he gained by constitutional methods. He had told him tbut very little had been gained that way. When lie spoke like that he did not mean them "to grab a sword and go flown tbo street looking for Massey," because people would only say tho Communists were causing tin n e trouble There would he a street rabble that would do more harm than good. , A blind man in the audience, (said witness'), relinked Galbraith and said he should not sjienk to the people there in the hull but should go out into the street and speak to tho people there. The blind man said that Galbraith should speak to tho people in language they could understand.

The defence to-day was a denial of tlie charge. ft was contended that the lecture was scientific, with no intention to excite to violence. I The .Magistrate, -Mr Hunt, said he had no doubt that the accused had used the words which brought about the prosecution, and lie was satisfied that the speech encouraged to lawlessness. "Galbraith, he proceeded, was probably carried away by his subject, and 1 am satisfied that he did not put a curb on his tongue in order to comply with tho law.” The Magistrate said that if these speeches are used indiscriminately it will he verv difficult to keep the peace. These sort’ of speeches may fall upon ill-balanced minds and result in serious crimes of violence. Such a person might bring a revolver and shoot a capitalist for instance. It is to the benefit, of the country that these sort of things should stop. Had the speech been made in a street, lie would not have the slightest hesitation in sending the accused to gaol. It the accused aspired to he a maker of law, lie should first learn to abide hv it. \ fi„p of C 25 was imposed with cists, or in default, two months’ imprisonment.