HE DIDN'T KNOW.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVIII, Issue 246, 15 October 1917, Page 2

HE DIDN'T KNOW.

A RELIGIOUS OBJECTOR'S POStTJON A charge under the War Regulations Act of having wilfully answered in a false and misleading manner the questions ol a constable respecting his military status as a reservist was heard against a mar named Samuel Weir Batten before Mr F. V. Frazer, S3L, to-day. He admitted that when a constable called at his house in Mount Eden and asked him if he were enrolled he replied that he had nol enrolled. In reply to questions respect ing age and nationality, he produced a birth certificate showing that he was 4c years of age, and had been born in Cornwall, England. These things defendant said were true to the best of his knowledge, but the police, having communicated with the Government Statistician, Ileged that Batten had spoken falsely .hen he said he was not enrolled. As a latter of fact he had enrolled as a reervist. The defendant quite frankly dmitted that he had strong religious bjections to fighting or military service, point of view held by others of his imily, and several friends, though they id not go so far as to say that the eople with his particular set of religious ieas formed a "denomination." His rely to the charge was that he had told he truth so far as he knew it. He haO igned and sent the registration papers ut had stated therein that he was not repared to serve In a military capacity nd he was cortsequently-of opinion that le had not enrolled. If he had 6tated in he registration paper that he was will ng to serve in a military capacity, he aid, he would have considered he had enrolled." evidently holding the opinion to enrol meant to enlist in the mill ary sense. It was elicited in the course if cross-examination that in consequence if having told his employers, when asked, hat he had not enrolled he iwas disai<*ed from the job. His Worship stated that though defenant showed a remarkable ignorance oi he general, present-day meaning of the rord "enrol," yet he appeared to have uite unwittingly misled the constable. t was good proof of his genuineness hat he had lost his job by an exactly imilar mistake on his part as to the neaning of "enrol," for he was then enolled. but 6aid, and apparently believed hat he was not enrolled. He had not rtlfully mi-led anybody, and the charge vould be dismissed.