RIOT TRIAL.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 123, 26 May 1932, Page 8

RIOT TRIAL.

DEFENCE CONTINUED. DENIAL OF PARTICIPATION. SHARPE ANI> MARTINOVICH. EVIDENCE OF COMPANIONS. Good progress has been made with the trial of the 14 men who are accused of taking part in .the rioting in the pity on the night of April 14. The caee for the defence was opened yesterday, when ten witnesses were heard. Addresses by counsel and the summing up by the judge, Mr. Justice Herdman, have still to come before the jury retires to , consider its verdict. The accused are: George Joseph Silver, Englishman, labourer, aged 32; George Devere'aux, Irishman, labourer, 38; Oswald Bourbeau,. Canadian, waterside worker, 51; John Sharpe, Scotsman, miner, 30; Simeon Elari, Australian, labourer, 21; Leo Martinovich, New Zealander, motor driver, 18; Harold Roberteon, New Zealander, labourer, 19; John Hubert Edwards, Englishman, salesman, 3S; Clifford John Durlson, New Zealander, labourer, 31; James William Eae Simpson, Scotsman, labourer, 32; Mate Dragovich, Dalmatian, labourer, 33; John ■William McCorkindale, New Zealander, miner, 37; William John Budd, Englishman, seaman, 35;. and Albert William Searles, Englishman",'seaman, 26. Two charges are preferred, namely, that in company with one Jaines. Henry Edwards and other persons unknown, they did take part in a.riot in Queen Street, and also that they did take part in an unlawful, assembly. \ ■ The cases ; are being heard", together. Eleven' of the accused are represented by one counsel,' Sharpe and Martino'tich by Another, and Searlee 'by a • third. I Each of the accused pleads not guilty. ' In the later ' stages ' of 1 yesterday's hearing, evidence was given" by the accused Dragovich, who, like the others", emphatically denied taking an active part in the rio.ting, throwing st.onee, or assaulting the police. He admitted under cross-examination that he had been before the' MagistrateV Court at Dunedhi on , two charges of theft arid another "of carrying a firearhi. "When he wa3 arrested and'taken in charge for throwing stoneei he only said he would come quietly. He "admitted he did not deny the offence at the time. •Procession Perfectly Lawrul. ' Addressing the jury .on behalf of Sharpe and Martinovich, counsel said it would be necessary for the jury to get each of tho 14 clearly in mind, or confusion would result. They must not be content to deal with the accused as a body. The procession itself was perfectly lawful, and what the jury, would have to decide would be "whether any of the accused were guilty of violence or incitement to riot. The evidence as to who struck the first blow was very nebulous, and the window-smashers were evidently a very different party from those who disturbed the peace at the Town Hall. Counsel submitted that the evidence against Sharpe was that of one man only. When counsel suggested that inciting to lawlessness with which Sharpe ihad been charged in the lower Court was the same as the charge of rioting on which he was now being tried, the Crown Prosecutor objected. His Honor said inciting to lawlessness was a distinct offence' altogether, and the ingredient? of- rioting were quite different, as counsel ought; :; to know. "You must not tell the jury that these men have 'been convioted of an offence identical with the one for, which they are now being tried," he said. Counsel: I am not putting it that •way. '. ' ."'''. His Honor: You must he 'careful. "Nebula ns" Evidence; ! Counsel submitted that although; they ■were two distinct crimes the facts on •which 'the 'Court relied were .identical with those jm. '-which,the .prosecution had relied in the lower Count. The evidence agains-t "SffarpaTPas'tpo nebulous and cloudy to convict upon, and there ihad .been no corroboration. of the. evidence of Detective Ha-yes'- Cwmsel submitted that tlhe detective had made a mistake. In the case against Martinovich, counsel also submitted there was no eorroboration of the evidence of Constable Jones. Accused had been at the meeting with a girl and when he heard the disturbance outside he ran out to ascertain the cause, leaving hie hat on the seat. He had hardly been outside the- hall a minute when a shower of stones caused the police to make a baton charge, Martinovich ran away with the rest, but was struck twice. Independent witnesses would testify to the fact that Martinovich never attempted to pick up a stone. . Not a Communist. Sharpe, who took the oath by affirmation, said he had no idea trouble was expected- and he took no part in the procession. 'He was only interested in the meeting which had been advertised. He ■was in the rear of the crowd which left the hall when the rush outside took iplace. He helped to bandage a boy whe £ad an injured foot, and after that went down Queen Street to the bottom, and then turned back. He denied that he ihad shouted "Keep it going, boys! oi that he encouraged lawlessness outside the broken window of a jeweller's shop, He was not a Communist and did not Ibelong to any of their organisations. Answering the Crown Prosecutor, accused said he was interested in religious political and educational subjects. Ht Ihad heard Bourbeau speak, and Budd James Edwards and Devereaux makt announcements at a meeting. Hβ hac spoken at an unemployed meeting, bui it was only to oppose a strike policy. Superintendent W. L. Wilson, of th( Auckland Eire Brigade, eaid that th( brigade had turned out at 8.35 p.m. oi the night of the riot. Two firemen wen injured, one, seriously, being struck oi the head with a piece- of metal. Evidence for Sharpe. Evidence on behalf of Sharpe wa given this morning by Walter Price, ; eawmiller's machinist. He said h ■walked up and down Queen Street wit accused, who took no part whatever i the rioting. Answering the Crown Prosecute: ■witness said he first saw Sharpe abou 8.45 p.m. He met accused once at meeting of unemployed, but did nc know him intimately. Tho Crown Prosecutor: Did you a , ' tend a Communist meeting with. Sharpe —No. Did you attend a meeting of tl lYiendi of tihe Soviet Union J—No. Did you see fruit being given out < a broken window by the proprietor • the shop?—No, but I saiw it being throw out by Mm when I was on the way .ba< gjfe "with Sharpe,

Counsel for accused: You were in I Sharpe's company all the time he was | walking up Queen Street? —Yes. And you eaw him when he spoke to people? —Yes. 'If he had been engaged in any disturbance you would certainly.have- seen it ? —Certainly. Albert Ernest Miller/ timber worker, said he was at the Town Hall. There was a disturbance in the.body of the hall and it was impossible to hear what the speakers were .saying. He saw Sharpe leave'the'hall and witness also went out. On the way out' out witness saw some .blood on the floor in the passage, but on reaching the street I everything was quiet. .Joseph Morley, carpenter," who was also in the Town Hall, said that he saw Sharpe get up and say ho would go outside and addrees the people. There was no disturbance outside the hall when witness reached the street. The Crown Prosecutor: Did you not hear, a call in the hall, "There's trouble outside"? —Something like that. There was such a disturbance it was hard to hear what was said. And you saw a rush from downstairs when the call was made?— Yes, some rushed out, but they may have come back;'l don't know. There was a big crowd in the vicinity of 1 the hall when you got outside? — There was a big crowd near Airedale Street. Percy Alfred Dean, relief worker, said i he met Sharpe at the bottom of Wynd- ] ham Street between 8.30 and 9 p.m. He ] saw Sharpe there and was talking to him for about live minutes. Replying to the Crown Prosecutor, , witness denied that there was trouble i at the bottom of Wyndham Street, and t that he- went across to see what was ( Igoing on.' ] ~ - .Martinovich's Defence. "'. The accused Martinovich said ho was ] a lorry driver and was in work. He j did not belong to any organisation, poll- 1 tical or otherwise. On the night of the < riot he eet out to go to the pictures. ) They met some friends and soon after- j wards saw the procession coming xtp < Queen Street. They went into the lown j Hall, having no difficulty in entering. When the disturbance broke out in Uie ( hall witness' "young lady" began to got , frightened, and an older woman who i was with them said it would be a good ] thint to "et her home. He went outside ] to see if It was safe to leave. His sister , was near' him. There was a" baton , charge bv the police less than a minute aW- he got outside.. 'While he was ] standing there, looking he received a ( 'severe, blow on the side of the neck. 1 j, started to run and a policeman followed ( ! me, getting hold of my coat, which came , ° Counsel:' .You have heard it said that : you threw a stone at a constable. What ISo you say to that?—lt is absolutely ■untrue; I had .nothing to throw. It has bden alleged that you had a , Ibrick in your pocket. Is that true I— , Absolutely untrue. ' ' i You were originally charged with takin" part in an unlawful assembly, and | . twice remanded. Then you were charged . with assaulting a constable. Did you ( know you were going to be charged with •that?—l hadn't the faintest idea until the charge was read out in the PoliceCourt. Norfolk Street Eviction. In answer to the Crown Prosecutor, the accused eaid that it was at the house of Wβ half-sister in Norfolk Street that an eviction riot took place. You know she is a member oi tne Communist party?— No,!•«»*• You know she went to Huntly ?—les, but I have not spoken to her for six '"'SSSeI for'accused: iWt k »°. w what the eviction of his half-sister m Norfolk Street has to do with the oaeo. ; His Honor: It may have a lot to do i^The 1 Crown Prosecutor: Now, this young lady that you.were at the meetM with has taken part in the processions, has she not?— Sh- was in.the procession the previous day. ; And you etill say that when you left home that night you and she intended ! to "-O to the pictures, and not to uie meeting in the Town Hall?—Wβ were Igoing'to the pictures, but changed our minds when we saw the procession. When did" you ; gel into the meeting. !We went-in with the P. and T. men. ' Before-or after the procession?—At the eaine time. . ■ ; Who was with you?—Mies Aehton and Mrs.'Anderson: i Did you hear any noise outside T—JN o. I heard a eb'ouf in the hall. . What was it?— Someone shouted twice, "They've got one of our men We are not going to stand for that." _ There was a rush from the hall. Did you rush out?— No. There wae a good deal of ehoutjngi — Yes, people were standing up and shout--ID g" «A Little Bit Curious." Why didn't you stop in the hall; it was much safer there?—Mies Ashton and Mrs. Anderson wanted to go home, and I intended to take them home. Answering further questions, accused said he left the hall by the Grey Avenue door. There wae a fairly big crowd listening to the loud-speaker. Stones were being thrown. The Crown Prosecutor: You nad jeit Mise Ashton and the other lady in the hall?— Yes. . ' Why didn't you go back?—l was just a little bit curioue, like a lot of other people. Were there any police near the door when you came out? —No. Do you suggest that your curiosity held you so much that when the crowd started to run you got mixed up in them and stood there?— Yes. I did not know what was on; I had only emerged from the hall about one minute. Mrs. Elea Anderson said she accompanied Martinovieh and hie young lady into tho Town Hall. Their first intention was to go to the pictures. When the disturbance broke out in the hall the young lady became very excited, almost hysterical, and witness thought it was beet to get her home. Witness corroborated the evidence given by ■ accused. Scenes Outside Hall. The ecenes outside the hall were i described by a youth named Gabriel , Molloy, who said he stood alongside Marl tinovich outside the nail. Accused took no part in the rioting, and did not throw anything. A baton charge was made and he (Martinovich) wae struck. All i accused had been doing had been lieteni ing to the loud-speaker. Stones were i thrown, but witness could not say who i was throwing them, or why. i The Crown Prosecutor: The etones were being thrown from Grey's Avenue '» into Queen Street?— Yes. t And the police were in Queen Street? * —Yes. t You saw Mrs. Phillips, the eister oi Martinovich, come up to him? —Yes, she '•• was frightened and wanted him to etay ? with her. ■ And did he? —No, he stepped out in e the roadway to eee Lf it was safe to take her across the road. >f Witness said that witness stood on >f the footpath when the police suddenly n made a baton charge from Queen Street, ic The crowd began to retaliate and used weapons on the police.

In answer to counsel-for Martinovicli the witness said that from the moment ho first saw Mactinavicli outside the hall, till lie (Martinoyieh) was batoned, would be about five minutes. Kathleen Phillips, sister of Martinovich, said she was among the crowd listening to the loi.d speaker in Grey's Avenue. She saw her brother come out of the hall and she spoke to him, asking him to wait with her. At the time there was a coocl deal of noise in Queen Street. Her brother walked along the footpath a short distance and then stepped on to the roadway. As he did eo the police charged and her brother was struck. Before he had gone a few yards he was struck a second time and knocked down. She was positive her brother had not thrown anything. John Robertson, accountant for a firm of solicitors, said he had seen Martinovich a number of times during the past five years on trustee business. Witness had always found him of good character. Martinov'ich struck him as a quiet, wellbehaved lad. Witness did not know him outside of business. Evidence of character was also given by Horatio Nelson, a fruit and vegetable dealer, who said Martinovicli, who was one of his lorry drivers, was quiet and well-behaved, and so far as witness knew not associated with any movement. "He is one of the best," said witness. Address to Jury. Addressing the jury on behalf of Searles, counsel said accused was a man of excellent character. "I don't wish to make him any different from his companions in misfortune, but he is certainly in a different category from them so far as the events of this night are concerned," said counsel.

The gratitude of every right-minded and public-spirited person was due to the police for the able manner in which they dealt with the situation, but they were nfter all only men, and were not infallible. It was under circumstances etich as this, which made accurate identification almost impossible, that, the human characteristic of fallibility became prominent. The jury had the evidence of four witnesses who said they would not attempt to identify any of the individuals they saw that" night. The accused Searles was an industrious, honest and hardworking man. He left home on the niffhf of April 14 and went to the Town Hall with the expressed intention of hearing Mr. J. A. Lee and the other speakers. He arranged to meet his wife and her mother at 9 o'clock at the foot of Grey's Avenue. To keep that appointment he left the hall at half-past eight. On reaching the street he heard a noise Hko a shot, and, somewhat startled, rtishcd over to where he was to meet his wife. Not seeing her there, he van across the street, and was then struck from behind ■by a policeman.

Accused's Graphic Story.

Albert William Searlcs, labourer, residing at G2, Ponsonby Road, and ono of the accused, said before he left home to go to the Town Hall he arranged to meet his wife and her mother at nine o'clock at the cornei- of Wakefield Street. He secured a seat about four rows from the stage. About five minutes after the procession had entered there was a rush to get out again. He could hear banging on the door at Grey Avenue. Mr. Lee had been speaking about ten minutes when a man in tho gallery began calling out, "Mr. Chairman." The man then came down and mounted the platform. Ho then said, "I propose to move a resolution asking

for the release of the men looked in a room in the Town Hall." There was then a rush to get out of the hall, and pandemonium reigned. Accused then got up and left the hull by the main door. On his way out he noticed in the vestibule a pile of palings like those produced in the Court. On reaching the street lie saw a policeman standing by the door. There was blood on the back of his head. Accused next heard a noise like a shot from a gun, and ran over to the corner of Wakefield Street, where lie was to meet his wife. She was not there, so he turned, and. thinking she might be in the crowd near the Town Hall, started to run across the road, lie heard a scull'le and, glancing behind, saw a constable coming at him with a baton. He put up an arm to protect himself, and was hit on the chest and knocked down, lie was then arrested, lie would swear positively that he was wearing a hat that night. His Honor: What do you do?—I am a labourer at present. lam a seaman, but left the sea in December last. Accused said he was not on relief work because he was told that lie could not be employed on relief work until be bad been in the country six months. He belonged to , no Communist movement, and had never been in Airedale Street. Tic had been in prison ever since his arrest, and had not discussed the riot with anyone except .his solicitor. Conversation with Constable. While in Mount Eden on remand, continued accused, he was spoken to by Constable Gibson, and they had a conversation about accused's injured hip. Subsequently, at the Police Court, accused again saw Constable Gibson, and when asked why the constable had visited liim at Mount Eden the constable said, "1 was Rotting you mixed up with someone else."