JUDGE'S COMMENT IN THE GARDEN CASE

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 257, 22 June 1932, Page 5

JUDGE'S COMMENT IN THE GARDEN CASE

(Press Assn.-

"treat all alike" NO FINES TO ALLOW MEN WITH MONEY TO ESCAPE , . APPEALS DISMISSED

-By TelegraBli — G .■ovneht').

Rec. June 21, 7.55. p.m. - y SYDNEY,' Tuesday. The Appeal Court dismissed furthdr appeals from members - of the Ne\y Giiprd convicted of assaultMr; J l S. > Gardexr. . In one instance the sentence was reduced from thrce months to one month, but in all the other seven appeals d'is- ; missed, the sentences of. thrtee months stand. The eight men were convicted of assaulting Mr. Garden and his sons at his home, on May 4. At the end of the hearing of the first appeals, which took two days, his Honour, Mr. Justice Curlewis, said: "In this case I am not going to pretend that when I eame into Court yesterday I-did not know that this was a case in which a' great deal has been said and written and in which everyone except myself knew exactly who was guilty and knew exactly all the circumstances," said his Honour in suniming up. "I therefore did what becomes natural to a judge by reason of his training-. I came into Court with my mind absolutely blank on the merits or demerits of the case and simply prepared to deal with the case on the evidence before me. I wished above all things to keep the political aspect out of it. I wanted it treated as a case of eight men who had gons into a man's private house and assaulted him. I was prepared tp hear anything they had to say in justification of that.

The line adopted by the def ence was to cross-examine Garden as to whether he was an atheist, secondly whether he was a Communist, and thirdly as to whether he had not invited the assault npon himself. I don't helieve the evidenoe for one moment that Garden invited the assault himself." His Honour then reviewed eertain aspects of the visit to Garden's house and events which occurred there. He did not think Garden was an accom.pliee. "A Fine Is Nothing" "It has been suggested that a fine would meet the case," his Honour proceeded. "I don't think so in the least. A filae is nothing to a man with plenty of money, while to a man without money it is a • mere euphemism for imprisonment. It is not fair. So far from qonsidering it as a political offence, and that that aspect is in mitigation of the oifence, I consider it an aggravation. If, when you disagree with a man's views as promulgated, you go to his house and assault him and take a tyre lever to hit his dog with, or even only tell him that if he does not stop promulgating those doctrines, you will run him out of the country, that is about as aggravated a case as could he possibly imagined. If it were a case of Communists doing that, could it be said that they should not be sent to gaol? I am not going to inflict a fine on a man who happens to have money, so that he can escape. All men will be treated alike as far as I am concerned."