ADDRESS ON WHARF

Hokitika Guardian, 6 September 1930, Page 2

ADDRESS ON WHARF

MAN PROSECUTED. (By Telegraph—Press Association). •'WELLINGTON, Sept. 2. A young man named Arthur Finch Marshall, was charged in the Police Court with addressing a crowd on the waterfront without ,a permit. He was convicted and ordered to come up for sent,once if called on in . twelve months. Sub-Inspector Lopdell said Marshall seemed to have been distributing notices of an unemployed demonstration to be held. He stood on a stool and addressed a crowd of about 50 or 60 people, A wharf employee asked Marshall to. stop, diut to no effect, so he tipped up the stool on which defendant was standing, Marshall, asked why he had not sought a permit to speak, said he had not made application as lie knew he would not be granted a permit, Accused cross-examined the witnesses brought ; by the police and told the Bench Ahat the evidence as to his having distributed pamphlets would have to be ruled out because it did not provide sufficient proof. “This charge proves the class nature of the capitalist law,” said defendant. “The regulation is directed only against members of the working' class. It applies right through Wellington and it will not allow speakers in the streets. The permits are given to religious bodies and so on, but not to the working class. The only thing is to get up and speak. This ban must be (broken down sooner or later, and the only way to beak it is to break it. The evidence that has been put forward has been rather mixed. Every member of the working class lias a perfect right to speak to 1 1, i« fe'llow-members if ‘lie wants to. The law is to prevent any expression of working class I ,opinion.” “It seems clear that I must convict the defendant,” said the Magistrate. “He lias committed a. breach of the by-law.”'. Sub-Inspector Lopdell, disregarding a protest of irrelevancy by defendant, said Marshall had been convicted on November 24 last of being in possession of seditious literature and fined £SO. He had served three months’ imprisonment in default of payment. He had gone to the West Coast, where he was associated with the same kind of activities a,s formerly. It was obvious from Marshall’s attitude that lie ignored the law. The Magistrate: Marshall, X think you misinterpret the by-law laid down here. It is laid down to prevent the gathering of crowds, and so hampering the proper control of the wharves.