The Government and the Sedition Cases.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16218, 22 May 1918, Page 6

The Government and the Sedition Cases.

The Cabinet, wo are glad to see, have decided, after full consideration, to adopt the course urged by "Tho Press" in regard to the cases of sedition in which the men Flood, Langley, and Hiram Hunter were concerned. Tho defendants are to be rolease<J upon their entering into bonds and finding sureties to be of good behaviour for twelve months, "and especially to refrain from all acts and utterances having any seditious tendency. Tho Acting-Prime

Minister, in the statement which we

publish, elsewhere, emphasises the fact that the men were Tightly convicted, that the observations of tho Magistrate in pronouncing judgment wore entirely justified by the facts proved, and that, considering tho nature and circumstances of the offence, the sentences were lenient. The men aro to be released on sureties, solely as an act of clemency on the part of the Crown. The circumstance that weighed with the Government in coming to this decision was that the seditious nature of the resolution which formed tho subject of the prosecution was not obvious to the Mayor, who presided, to the public men on tho platform, who uttered no protest, or to the large number of persons who voted in its favour. A very serious warning .is added that this exercise of tho Crown's prerogative is not to be regarded as a precedent, and that in future no excuse will bo allowed in mitigation of the full punishment for offences against the safety of the State in time of war. We feel sure that the action of the National Government in tho particular case under notice will meet with general approval. The Government has shown itself strong by tho firmness and promptitude it has displayed in dealing with cases of sedition and resistance to military service. Ministers would have been false to their great trust had they shown the slightest "weakness in this respect. Wo venture to think, however, that they have also now shown themselves strong in deciding to advise the prerogative of mercy in the first caso which might fairly be said to call for its extoTcise. In wielding the strong arm against future offences of this kind t as they aro bound to do, the support they will receive from th© public will, if anything, be strengthened b- their wise and discriminating lenity in the caso under notice.