THE MILTON SALVATION ARMY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4527, 19 September 1893, Page 3

THE MILTON SALVATION ARMY.

More Conuiotions. (By Telegraph.—Presa Association), Donedik, September 18. At Milton to-day, before Mr Haw. kins, R.M., further oases against the Salvation Army were heard. The first case called charged John Keen (butcher), James Keen (laborer), Alexander MoVickar (laborer), James M. Fountain (confectioner), George Asbmoro (laborer), Edward Bugden {laborer), Frank Matthews (Salvation Army officer), on the information of 1 the Borough Clerk, with nnlawlully taking part in a procession on the 10th of September in tbe Borough of Milton, without having previously obtained permission from tbe Borongk Council, contrary to Beotion 59 of bylaw 2.

MrD. Eeid prosecuted, and ibe do fendants.were unrepresented. Captain Matthews contended that the by-law was unfair and unreasonable, and they recognised the present procfigpgrfo persecution. The byJaws were treated with impunity by others, and he instanced tbe case of a football tesm marching along tbe footpath with two flags. The Army'B processions had been orderly, and the rmusrcsacred. Be said further that they were encouraged by the decision of the Chief Justice of England that no odo could interfere with Englishmen marching down a stteet, and that to prevent a band from playing was an infringement of tho liberty of the subject. That was tbe effect of the deoision in the Whitechurch case He would also urge that the case ot McGill and Garbntt did not apply, That decision affected playing instruments, not marching.

The Magistrate: You are wrong there. for holding aproces* The sewnd information was then read, Itcharged Matthewe, MoViokpr and tbo two Keens with playing instruments on the date mentioned without permission, contrary to section 60 of the by-laws, The defendants admitted having played, but pleaded were within their rights in doing so. Matthews, since] taking charge at Milton, had made it a point to use cross roads, so as not to Btand in front of any particular place, and not to giye cause of offence or annoyance. He said they had a right to the use of the streets. His Worship said he thought Matthews was mistaken when he maintained the Army had a right to form processions in the Btreets, notwithstanding what the Lord Chief Justice of England had said. The Army bad been t?ld tbtf io New, Zeqlspf .they

bad 110 right, to do 80, and yet (bey persisted in doing it. He must tell tbero that the Lord Chief Jußtice of England's views with regard to the liberty of the subject had' been most expressly and unanimously deolared to be wrong by the Court of Appeal in England. The law relied on in Kerr's oase bail been confirmed in the esse of Harrison v. the Duke ofißutland, Bnd he must tell Iho Army as they relied so much on the Lord Chief Justice of England, that in the case ol the Queen v. Hopkins it whs decided in tbe Appeal Court in February, 1898. Two Salvationists were convioted by a magistrate, ono for playing, tbe other for singing in tbe public streets, and tlrny wore fined 40s. Thoy said that they would !go to prison for one month eaob, The oase went before tho Court of Appeal on the toohnical question as to whether a magistrate could send to prison for one month, and the Court of Appeal decided that the conviction was perfectly right. The Lord Chief Justice ot England said he wholly assented to the decision giyen by the Judge. He (Mr Hawkins) was in duty bound-lie could not do otherwise—to convici the defendants in the case, but he would reserve awarding punishment until 2 o'olock.

On the Court rosuming, Mr Hawkins said that, while giving the defendants credit for acting as they believed conscientiously,he must point out that, while they claimed liberty for themselves, tlioy seem to have forgotten tboir obligations towards others, the obligations imposed by the Bible, which they professed to accept at their rule of faith. So long as ho was enttuited with the administration of justice bo would uphold the constituted authorities l>y preventing disturbances and annoyance. He would tako into consideration the possibility that tho Governor's leniency in a previous case had led ; tbe defendants to think that they were entitled tod-fy tho law. Ho would i however, make the penalties low. Matthews, as a man in authority, and John Keen, as having been previously convioted, would be fined 20s or 14 days, and the others 5s or seven days, on the procession oharges, and on the second information Matthews and Keen wero fined 20s each or 14 days. The others wero fined Baeach or seven days, twees of imprisonment, in default or payment, to be concurrent. Grace was allowed till 2 o'clock tomorrow to pay the lines.