AUCKLAND MOT.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20612, 30 July 1932, Page 18

AUCKLAND MOT.

TRIAL OF J. H. EDWARDS. JURY UNABLE TO AGREE. (fICSI ISSOCUMO* T«LSG*A«-) • AUCKLAND, July 29. The trial of James Henry Edwards on a charge of taking part in the riot on April 14th was concluded in the Supreme Court to-day. The jurymen wore kept together last night. About thirty witnesses, mostly policemen, gave evidence for the Crown, their evidence closely following that given in the Lower Court and in other mt cases. Detective-Sergeant Doyle said that he had previous experience nets, including the Lloyd George not in Birmingham. but ho nover saw a wore disorderly crowd than tho ono outside the Town Hall. . . . Counsel for tho dofonco said that tho Crown, by skilfully presenting the evidence, had coloured the case against Edwards. Many weapons were* exhibited in Court, but there was no evidence that Edwards used any of them. Tlic police made mistakes like other people, and he intended to call evidence which would entirely disagree with much of the polico testimony. Accused Gives Evidence. Edwards, who said he was a married man with eight children, stated that when walking m the procession to the Town Hall _he called out "the usual workingclass slogans," namely, Shall we go into slave camps, or shall wa fight for our wives and kidsf" He had no intention of creating trouble. At tho start of the riot he saw tho crowd outside the main door break into a bchucirclo, and the police were driving them back with batons. He ran along, intending to call upon the crowd to give no trouble, but was struck down. Cross-examined, tho aeeuscd said that ho was a member of the Communist Party for about a year, and gave three addresses. Tho Unemployed Workers' Movement regarded him as a leader. The Labour Defence League was composed of men in all walks of life. The leaguo was for tho legal and financial protection of ''men in an unfortunate jiosition like myself." The accused, when asked why ho went into hiding after tho riot, paid that he knew from experience that in times of trouble the polieo always looked for those they considered to be the leaders, particularly if they happened to be Communists. Tlie Crown Prosecutor: But you had done nothing, you sayf Accuseds That ia so, but I belonged to a party not very popular with the police just then. -The accused admitted telling the crowd that if they were attacked they should crowd round the pelice and take their batons off them. Other witnesses for the defenee were then called.

His Honour's Summing Up. Summing up, his Honour pointed out tbat the most dangerous type in the community might be not the man •who was openly violent, but tie man who was fluent with his tongue and perhaps saturated with undesirable literature, and who influenced hia fellows to take part in such proceedings as those of April 14th. There was ample evidence that Edwards was associated with the procession that night, and ample evidence that the rioting was not a sudden explosion, but' premeditated. In such circumstances as arose the police were fully justified in using their batons, and if Edwards did, as he said he did, urge these peoplo to take the batons from the police "and use no violence," then he was undoubtedly encouraging a riot. What right had he, when the police were discharging their duty, to encourage liis men to seize their batons? The jury, after a four hours' retirement, disagreed. A new trial was ordered.