“I WON’T GO”

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21361, 4 March 1941, Page 6

“I WON’T GO”

ARMED FORCES APPEAL FRACAS DURING CASE CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR LED WEEPING FROM ROOM (By Telpg-rapn.—Press Association) AUCKLAND, Tuesday There was an extraordinary scene followed by a fracas at the rear of the room at today’s sitting of the No. 1 Armed Forces Appeal Board, when an appellant broke down under crosAi-examin-ation and had to be led weeping from the room. At one point the intervention i a constable was necessary and damage was caused to a chair. As a result of remarks made to the magistrate and members of the board by appellant’s brother at the time of the scene, Mr C. R. Orr-Walker, S.M., the chairman, later ordered that an apology should be made and indicated the steps that would be taken by the board on future occasions. Appellant was Ronald Albert Chilvers, a laundry hand, aged 23, whose objection to military service was on conscientious grounds. “I am against war and the taking of lffe of fellow creatures,” said appellant. “I belong to no particular sect. I have held these views as long as I can remember.” In answer to the chairman appellant said he had no one to support his case. Difficult Position “The board is in a rather difficult ; osition in such cases as these,” said Mr Orr-Walker, “it is so easy to say that one is against war. Some appellants are sincere, of course, and some are not. The degree of the sincerity of an appellant can only be disclosed by the general conduct of his life and light is thrown on that by the testimony of reputable persons, who come forward to support the appeal. If that was not so there would be little use of the appeal board at all. Appellant, in great excitement, then said “I will not go to war no matter what happens. I will never go to war. Even if you send for me I will not go. You cannot send me.” He then broke down and wept loudly, kneeling on the floor with his arms across the witness table and his head lolling partly below it. Offensive Remarks Made “He is overwrought,” said the chairman. “Someone had better take him outside.” Assisted by members of the audi,ence at the rear of the board room, appellant’s brother then led him away. At the door leading from the room offensive remarks were hurled at members of the board. The constable on duty then intervened, in an attempt to stop the disturbance and there was a brief fracas that was not visible from the appeal j board room and also the sound of the splintering of wood, which was later j revealed to have been a chair. Still weaping loudly appellant was given a seat outside and was attended to by onlookers. There was a brief pause in the board room until the disturbance sub- ; sided somewhat, and then Mr OrrWalker said to his fellow members ; of the board: “Did you hear that language.” The next case called was that of Cyril Edgar Chilvers, a brother of tne previous appellant. Chairman’s Remarks “Your brother was overwrought,” said Mr Orr Walker.” He has not yet been medically examined so his case can stand over in the mean- ( while. It appears that there is some- 1 thing wrong with his nervous system. But the language used was reprehensible, though I could make some allowance, even for that, under some circumstances. I am not aware that this board showed any discourtesy towards the appellant. “He was obviously unable to support his appeal but the fact that he broke down was not due to any treatment he had here. I asked lor his brother wnen that happened. I noticed that you came back and also used insulting language.” Chilvers: I did not. I used no insulting language. I was worked up about my brother. The chairman: Anything in the way of contempt of Court can be dealt with by imprisonment you know'. I wish to give you a chance of expressing regret for what you said. I am, then, prepared to make allowances. I wish to say to you and others that a repetition of such a scene will be met by imprisonment. In future I shall order that the offenders be taken into custody and taken to gaol. “Not Political Meeting” “This is not a political meeting. This is a Court and its dignity and authority must be upheld.” Mr Orr Walker then asked Chilvers to express his regret. Appellant: I regret the affair. I realise I lost my temper. I realise that I snould not have done so. Mrs Chilvers, mother of both appellants, then came forward and expressed regret for the happening. She explained that the boy who had broken down had suffered a physical disability as a youth. Mr Orr Walker: It is probable that he will not be passed. In any case we accept the apologies and hope it will not occur again. The brothers’ case, based on similar grounds, 'was dismissed.