FINED £50

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10276, 10 May 1919, Page 9

FINED £SO

EDITOR OF “ WORKER ” MAGISTRATE’S DISSERTATION ON POLITICAL ACTION. AND ON PRESENT DISCONTENT. L_ The editor nnd the publisher of the “Maoriland Worker” were charged in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday with having incited a seditious strike—a strike of engaged in the frozen meat industry. Tho offence was said to have been contained in the publication of a letter in the “Worker” which ran:—

I suggest that every worker connected with the meat trade in nowever indirect a form, should refuse to take any part in producing and distributing meat until our war-pro-fit-aiming and epidemic-spreading Government pass such laws that not one pound of mfttit shall leave tho country till our full wants are supplied of tho best meat at a reasonable price, or, as an alternative, whenever wo are handling meat for export practise the go-slow policy to such an extent that it becomes unprofitable to export all.—(Signed) Bolshevik. Tho defendants. William Kraig, editor, and John Glover, publisher, were represented by Mr P. J. O’Regan. The case was heard by Mr_ F. A. rrazer, S.M., and Mr P. S. K. Macassey appeared for the Crown. A PLEA OF OVERSIGHT.

Mr O’Regan said that the charge was one of a breach of ;the War Iterations and both defendants pleaded guilty “This,” he continued, ‘is . a broach of the War Regulations, winch are still in force. Mr Glover was the publisher of tho paper and Mr Kraig was the editor, a position to_ which he had only recently been appointed. My instructions are that Mr Glover is the publisher and though liable m virtue of the statute he has no actual knowledge of anything that goes .into the paper. He does not exorcise any control over tho literary side of the paper. Of course, wo are technically guilty, and we plead guilty. Mr Glover has never been before a court, before. Mr Kia eavs that he struck several paragraphs out of the letter. Ho tried to refer to the. War Regulations hut could not got a copy of them, and I may say that I tried Yesterday could not. ±io I thought'ho struck everything offensive out of the letter, hut overlooked this. He was busy at the time bringing out i a special issue of the paper. The first ! idea be had that he had committed a i breach-ref- the regulations was the receipt of a summons: You must take into consideration the intention of the offender. If there was an intention to stir up industrial strife it would ho a serious matter and one of which they would have to take the consequences It is not a thing of that kind. I ask you to take a lenient view. We have bommitted a technical breach and it will not occur again. AVn p K K WHAT IF THE MEAT u OKhS CLOSED DOWN? The Crbwais''vie\t' of'the’-case was out by Mr Macassey as follows. Iho frozen meat industry was declared essential to the public welfare ibis is regarded as a very serious case, because there are large quantities oi meat in the freezing works, and it these works were closed down that would be a very serious matter. It is contended that these escaped notice. I would like you to read the words or the letter. I submit it is for the editor of this paper to have read these words and say he did not think they were seditious. Mr O’Regan: I must say that Mr Macassey has never been an editor of a paper, or he would appreciate better the difficulties which beset one m that position. . Mr O’Regan said that Kraig wa« present, and the Magistrate agreed that he might be presented for crossexamination. Kraig went mto the witness box. Mr Macassey: How long have you been the editor? Kraig: About a month. Did you read this letter yourself F Yes. i

Did you not see that it was a breach of the War Regulations? —No. 1 did not have my mind on tho War Regulations at tho time. ■ " Read this. Is it ,nqt an open advocacy of the strike?—No. I don’t take it that way, knowing the men and the psychology of the people concerned. It would have no more effect than an advocacy of tho blowing up of the House of Parliament. You don’t think it is an advocacy of a strike?—lt may be regarded as such, but I know it would have no influence whatever on tho men in tho meat trade. '

Is that why it was passed by you?— Oh no 1 passed it in mistake.

Where does the mistake come in? — At the time I was exceedingly busy, and wo have no more excuse to offer than that it escaped notice. I behove that I did notice that there was something wrong in it, and I excised a few paragraphs. ARE MEN ENTITLED TO THRO tv UP THEIR JOBS?

Mr O’Regan told us that several parts had been excised. Did you exuse them ?—Yes.

Why didn’t you excise the last part? —There was certain doubt about the matter, hut I did not think it was contrary to the War Regulation*. Hevo you tho letter? —Yes. Aro you prepared to produce it?— Yes.

Produce it.—l have not got it With me The matter excised did not apply to, the meat trade, however. What did it refer to?—To such things as free love. I did not thinr. it wise to have those portions published.

Does it not appear to he an open advocacy of tho strike?—lt may be regarded as such, but, knowing the peo-

TTiat is not the point. I ask you, is it not an advocacy of tho strike or tho go-slow policy?—Well, go-slow; that cannot he regarded as a strike. You know that people have been prosecuted for it, and that it is i strike ?

Tho magistrate; Well, it is a strike on tho job, is it not? However, tho first part of the letter appears to advocate a strike.

Kraig: The mere fact of a man refusing to work,at an occupation is not a strike. A man is entitled to knock off a job. The magistrate; Yea, but this letter says “every man.” If every man goes

off the job because of this letter, then it is a strike. Kraig: It is an open question it every man is not entitled to throw up his work. The magistrate: But if the men combined to do this, surely it is a strike?

Kraig; Unless there was a conspiracy to do so there would not he a broach of the law. The magistrate: However, you say you did not deem it an advocacy of a strike ?

Kraig: No, ; and don’t do so yet,

THE WRITER WHO SIGNS HIMSELF “BOLSHEVIK.”

No other evidence was called, and the magistrate said: One point need not be made —that- the editor and the publisher of a newspaper must take the responsibility of whatever appears m the paper, ami the defence or lack or intention is of less weight in such a case than it would be in the case of publicity which was not in connection _ with a newspaper. The reason is obvious. A newspaper is largely circulated, and what appears in it is in a permanent form. it is not like the spoken wold heard to-day, forgotten to-morrow. I? or this reason, it is generally recognised that the responsibility of the editor and the publisher is generally absolute responsibility. In other words, the law requires that persons in that position shall take the most extreme care that nothing is published which will prejudice the law. Now, so far as this particular passage is concerned, the writer who signs himself “Bolshevik ’ is worried in his mind about tho present price of meat.in New Zealand. I don t want to make any comment on the fact that he signed it “Bolshevik,” except that that signature might have had the oflect of causing the editor to take extra care to scrutinise whatever was written over such a name. I know there is a, "rent deal of controversy about what Bolshevik stands for. ' The word has, to a certain extent, become a catchword and has been given various meanings. Like all catch-words, it is a dangerous one. The writer of the letter has been exorcised in his mind about the high cost of meat,. and he puts tins suggestion of a strike or a go-slow policy as a possible remedy. lam putting it that way, because I want, as far as possible, to put myself in the place of the man who wrote the letter. Of course, a magistrate must not discuss political questions, and I don’t intend to do so, but I would like to clear the air a little bit for tile writer of this

letter and.others who think the same way. I want to make it clear that what I say is said with a certain amount of sympathy. Naturally,, high prices fall more on tho working class than most people, although one must remember that there is another class that has suffered considerably through the high prices—people with small, fixed incomes, who have nothing to do with tho Arbitration Court, and who do not experience any automatic rise by remuneration when the cost of living goes up. They have to suffer without redress. However, one. must realise that the increase, in .tho. cost of living does affect the ''working "glass'very seriously and naturally one looks for complaints. POWER OF THE DEMOCR ACY. I should like this person who signs himself “Bolshevik,” and others who think with him to realise that anything that may be desired by way of a remedy can be brought about by Parliamentary act, by democratic methods, without resort to anything ,_qf the nature, ofdirect adfioii and Violence?'" Cvcri SO per cent, of the population of this country who are self-supporting are either wage or salary-earning. Of tho remainder, a large proportion are people in a small way of business, whose sympathies would be with the wage-earning class. In a democratic country the majority can carry everything before it. I mention that for this reason: Every country depends for its existence on what it produces. ■ This country pro-, duces very' largely meat. This country has to pay a very large sura for war expenses —not only the cost of the actual war, but the cost of pensions, and the largo expenditure that must be associated with repatriation. The money which is required for these purposes must come from taxation. That taxation must in its turn come from what the country produces. There is a shortage of meat, or a large demand for it on the Home market, which' has caused the price to go up by leaps and bounds. As we produce more meat than we can consume, our meat goes Home and brings a large price, and this is where democracy comes in. It is within the power- of -the democracy of this country to say that the people who are getting the high prices for this meat shall pay their fair share of the taxation. That is a matted - that is well within the- scope of the democracy of this country. The wage and salary-earners and tho people in a small way of business are BO per cent, of tho population, and every man’s vole -and every woman's vote is of equal value. ms WORSHIP ON POLITICAL ACTION. There is another way in which Parliamentary action can be taken. I have said that in order to get the huge amount of money we want for taxation it is necessary to export as much as we can and get as high a price as we can, and then tax people who are getting those high prices. If wo _ were to get the lowest prices we could, it would bo considerably to our disadvantage. There is still another way of taking Parliamentary action, and that is by fixing tho price of meat for sale in New Zealand, and by making up any loss to the producers with a tax on those who export —a- levy somewhat on tlio lines of the, butter levy. I understand there is some fixation of meat prices. 1 don’t know what it is, and I don’t want to go into it, but I want to point out that these matters can all be dealt with by Parliamentary action. Those equalisation taxes aro not always easy to work out. They present considerable economic difficulties. It is a matter entirely for Parliament, Parliament is elected by a majority of the people. As to the price of meat, J. took an opportunity the other day to look up soma English papers. The English prices are la 9d per lb lor beef with 1C er cent, bone, and the same for mutton with 24 per cent, bqno. I said just now a magistrate must not talk politics. I am not going to do that. What ‘I have said is with the object of explaining why there aro these high prices, 'and of pointing out that a political act is all that -is necessary to bring about any change a majority of tho people think desirable. It is just a question whether a big drop in the price of moat hero might not moan a big increase in taxation, which might have to he borne h.y the workers in tho same proportion as other sections of tho community. One has to be pretty careful in working out theso matters. I don’t say it would bo so, but there is always that possibility to he watched for. I have said as much as this because 1 want to

approach this writer’s frame of mind from a sympathetic point of view. THE POLITICAL BALL AT THEIR FEET. As the meat industry is such an important industry and provided so muca by taxation, the War Regulations have made it an essential industij an industry whiclPmust be carried on —and in respect of it it is an offence »o advocate a strike or a go-slow policy, which is tho efuivalent of a strike «n the job. Although the war is over as far as hostilities aro concerned, "<•' aro now at one of the most critical stages financially, and it is necessaiy that our essential industries should b‘protected Irom any interference in the way of strike, which might affect not just the meat producers, but the whole country, xmojudicially. There is another basis for general discontent among the working population—the question of th ewages system. But that is a- matter _ about which a great deal has been said and written of late, and 1 think that >r the workers will only have a littlo more patience and bo a littlo more conciliatory there is a great deal in store. I s ippose everyone has read tho newspaper forerences to the Gorton Foundation and tlie Whitley scheme. These aro things which I think could be extended in Now Zealand in a way m which they could uot h« extended at Home.

The workers in this country have tho political ball at their feet, and I think if they will take the advice of the executive of the Federation of Labour 1 in the direction of meeting in conference with the employers and trying to arrange tilings on a basis that will be fair all round, a great deal will,be done in tins country yet. Such a. conference would do a great deal of good. 1 hope to' see such a conference. The conference should be called while no dispute is on, because it would he more effective than a conference held while everyone is heated over a di:>put.

“I MUST CARRY OUT THE LAW. When a man writes as Mr. Whitley does, there is something in him. And what lie seeks is what we -are aiming at iu this country. AVe want to- see everyone getting his maximum opportunity . Our educational system is based on that idea. I know it does not go quite far enough at present, but the idea is thin every man’s son shall have an opportunity of developing himself in any direction in which his talents take him. Al! this is within, the capacity of i-his nation by political means. Although ! can sympathise with the people who feel the pinch of high prices of meal and other, commodities, I mlist-cUrry out the law on the' question of the advocacy of strikes or go-slow policies, which would have tho effect of interfering detrimentally with one of ' tho main propositions of our financial existence. I have said as regards the responsibility of the parties concerned that R is impossible to avoid the responsibility of the editor or the publisher of a newspaper. In tills case I have reason fu: believing, apart from the evidence giver, to-day, that the editor was.'sincere in his-desire to,.steer clear of -the War Regulations—that ho excised certain portions of “Bolshevik’s” letter. He certainly made a grievous mistake hi letting through what he did, but, as I just said, I have reason to believe that ho did.not intend to come within the law. I have in mind an article he wrote some time ago, when I had the honour of being the person referred to. I bear him' no ill-will for that. It was regarding ho-'fftqted that it' w ; aA hot" the Intention' of his paper to advocate any form of sedition, and ho thought tho man who brought himself within tho law on that subject was foolish. I am inclined to til ink that this present matter was an oversight, although it was a foolish mistake. The publisher is in a different position, as he did not see tho letter at all.

, .SERIOUS. ROSSIBIUTIES, AND V- ‘I FINES OF £6O. As to the matter of the fine, one must consider the serious nature of the possible consequences. Kraig- may contend that Mio meat workers might no: take notice of this thing, but surely he does not mean to say -that the meai workers take no notice of the “Maori - land Worker.” People will often take something appearing in a letter as seriously as something in the editorial columns.; >1 have, therefore, to consider the possible serious consequences that might have ensued. For that reason the fine must be substantial, even if f accept Kraig’s assurance that the publication was an oversight so far as ho was concerned. Tho fine, no doubt, will fall on the. organisation which runs the newspaper—the editor and tlie publisher are in the capacity of servants. Tho editor will be fined £3O and costs. (Someone in the auditorium whistled.) The publisher, whose connection with tho matter is only nominal, will bo fined £lO. (Again the long-dr-awn whistle.) And there will be costs against each defendant.