WAR REGULATIONS

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3044, 3 April 1917, Page 8

WAR REGULATIONS

CHARGES AGAINST CITY NEWSPAPERS

PLEAS OP JUSTIFICATION

DISCLOSURES REGARDING DEPARTMENTAL' METHODS

DEFENDANTS CONVICTED WITHOUT PENALTY

OTHER SUMMONSES WITHDRAWN

John Blundell and Louis-Proctor 'Blundell ' ("Evening Post") were charged as under:—(l) On, March 10, 1917, did without written consent of the military. authority publish in the "Evening Post" information-with respect to the movements of one of His Majesty's warships. (2) On the same date did publish information indicating the movements of an oversea steamer about to be engaged on a voyage to San Francisco.

George Henry Dixon ("New Zealand ,Times"/: (1) Did publish information in!; respect .to the movement of one of His' Majesty's warships. (2) Didpub--1 lish information indicating ; the movement of a ship engaged in a voyage, the course,'of which Jies partially north 1 of the Equator. (3) Did publish in- . formation indicating the movements of a ship about to' be • engaged on a voyage to San Franfiisco." ' Archibald Sando (Dominion) : (1) Did publish information in ' respect of the movements 'of ~ one ( of His .Majesty's warships. (2) Did publish information Indicating the movements of a ship about to be engaged on a voyage to ijan Francisco. (3) Did publish information indicating the movement of a ship the-course-of which lies partially north-of the Equator. - • Sir John Findlay, K.C., appeared .for the "New-Zealand Times," and Mr. M. Myors for-The Dominion, and the "Evening Post."' Mr. V. R. Meredith' conducted ,the cases for the Crown. By,consent it was.arranged that the cases concerning - a ship in'. the San Francisco trade should be taken first. The informations regarding this ship were identical as against all three papers. All defendants pleaded ."not guilty." The Crown Case, Mr. Meredith, " opening for tho Crown, said that the regulations were admitted, and that for the purposes of the case the' facts were admitted. The facta wero that the information was published without the consent of a military authority; and that tho was sailing for San Francisco, a port' north of the Equator. He mentioned that it would not be permissible in reporting tho case to tako notico of tho references to -the] movement of -ships. Mr. Myers: We can't be assumed toadmit that,-Your Worship. Mr. Meredith: Well; I niake it as a suggestion to tho. Press, as an indication that they must not do it. Sir John Findlay: There-is a great "deal that I wish to say that I should like to have published,- especially with regard to the declarations of [Ministers about the movements of ships. Mr. Myors suggested that the question might be 0110 for His Worship' to settle 111 the course of the case.

Mr. Meredith said that the regulations creating tho offences with which tlie defendants were charged were brought into force at the instigation of. the Imperial authorities. And theso, or'similar regulations, were in-force in other parts of the British Empire.

Sir John Findlay: I don't admit this. I don't admit that they were brought into force at tho instance of the Imperial authorities. 1 Mr. Meredith: Perhaps my friend is prepared to accept ' my statement of that fact., I am certainly:not prepared to call anybody to prove' it. Sir John Findlay: My 'friend is not entitled to say anything which he is not prepared to prove. This is-a highly punishable'offence.with which, we aro charged, and we can't- allow anything but strict proof to be admitted.

Mr. Meredith: Very well, I. will not say any • more on that -point. I will say, however, that it is clearly the object of the regulations not to allow any publication "of news which may (Erectly or indircctly be of use to the enemy; even by allowing deductions to be' made from any information that may leak out. It can be assumed that the Germans, in making preparation for this war over the lengthy period that they have "done, have left no stone unturned, and that they have at their disposal all possible information, including definite and accurate information as to all the British mercantile marine. It is difficult, possibly, in eacji case to say what tho effect of any particular piece of information may be, but this tact is certain, that if certain leakages from here or from other parts of the Empire ;«an bo pieced'together or added to information aleady in the hands of the enemy/ many valuable deductions for the purposes of tjicir campaign can be drawn. I submit that the object of these regulations is to prevent any such leakages, and to prevent any such' piecihg together of information for the advantage of the 'enemy. Mr. Meredith went on .to say that concealment of the movements of tho mercantile marine was not only essential in combating the submarino "campaign but information about shipping might give an indication as/to Whether ships we/e on their usual running or not. Information of this kind was of immense value to the' enemy, and the object of the regulations was to pr.erent such information gotting out.

. Mr. Meredith said ho mentioned the fact to give a, reason for -these .pro--1 ccedings. Warnings had been sent throughout .New Zealand, which had not always been effective, and a griev- ■ ance had arisen because those, papers , which had faithfully observed the regulations were at a disadvantage by , comparison : witli those, who did not. There was no suggestion that the 1 lapses giving rise to the present prosecutions were deliberate. -He was authorised to say that, speaking gener- , ally, the Wellington papers had shown .exceeding willingness to comply with the regulations. There was.no-sugges-tion , that they had been careless or had been trying to break the regulations. Although warnings -had been sent to them, the warnings had not been so numerous as those to other papers in other centres, where the breaches had been flagrant. Mr. Meredith put "in copies of tho ' War Regulations and also copies of the newspapers containing the reports to which exception was taken. No witnesses were called for tho Crown. By Whose Wish? For the Ernest Edward Muir, of the "Evening Post" staff, said that he had done all Defence work for his paper since tho war began, coming into" contact , daily with the military, authorities, from tho High Command downwards. The statement complained of was made during the hearing) of the first cases ' -under the Military Service Act, which were tried •by court-martial. He spoke with the Adjutant-General _ (Colonel Tate) and the Assistant-Adjutant-General (Major Lilley) on several occasions, about the publication of reports-of the proceedings. These officers -had told lum that .they wished tho. utmost publicity to be given to the proceedings. This he duly'reported to the editor of the "Post." It- was not within his knowledge- that some of the instructions coming to newspapers as to what they should or should not print came to the newspapers under the hand of the Ad-jutant-General and the Assistant-Adju-tant-General. , <Mr. Myers.\l have one. hero under tho hand of Major Lilloy. To Mr: Meredith: Neither of these officers had said anything about the' relaxation of the-prohibitions imposed by tho _ War Regulations. The War Eegulations w,ere not discussed; Presumably: tho officers would know the /evidence "to be led by the prosecution in those cases. Mr. Meredith suggested that they could not know what the defendant would say. - Mr. Myers: But this statement was made by a witness for the prosecution —by Detective Rawlel .To Sir John Findlay:. The statement was published in the "Evening Post" at 3.30 p.m. on Saturday, 1 March 10. It was. not until the morning of Monday, March 12, that similar statements * appeared in . The .Dominion and "the "New Zealand Times.". _ DaVid M. Gorman, also of the "Evening Post" staff, said that he reported the proceedings of the: , court-martial. He had 'never..previously been at a court-martial, and before : the court opened he went to -the' President and asked him what, if any, parts of the proceedings should not.be published. The President said that he would indicate what parts of the proceedings should not be published by closing the court. The court was closed four or live times during the hearing, and while the court was closed, lie (witness) was not in the court. The evidence 111 which the statement was made, was taken-while the court was open to the',public. To Mr. Meredith: He had no idea whether evidence was taken while the court was closed. Ho did not show his report to tho -President of the Court after he had written it. He did not think very much when preparing Ins report about the publication of Bhipping news. If ho had thought at tho time that the statement was a breach of' the regulations he would probably have excised it. '

Other Newspapers Concerned

In TTie past, various newspapers in New Zealand had published statements which had been contrary both • to tho letter and the spirit of the regula-,

tions ■ I Sir John Findlay: Have they been prosecuted

Mr. Meredith: I may inform my friend that proceedings are being taken in other centres outside of Wellington. . . . These are not isolated cases. He added that the matter was considered to be of such' importance that new regulations were being issued to limit still further the publication of shipping intelligence. A great number (J warnings had ; been sent to papers tnrougliout New Zealand about breaches or Hie regulations, and some to the (TcTendant papoTS. ,

Mr. Myers: You are prepared to prove t.liat ! J

'■'r. *li'rcdit.h: 1 will prove U

Mr. Myers: I object to my friend making a statement that > warnings

To Sir John Eindlav: He assumed from what the Presideut of the Court l]ad told 'him' that he was at liberty tp publish anything that occurred while the court was open.

What Ministers Say,

Joseph Pinker, editor of this ' 'Evennig Tost," said that both . Mr.' Muir and the sub-editor had reported to hiin the request of' the Adjutant-General that full publicity should be given to' the proceedings of. the court-martial. He had had scores of "emergency instructions" from the military as to,, the. publication of news. They were not regulations, and probably they were not enforceable, but the policy of the paper was one of co-operation, and-the instructions' were always ' obeyed.. Mr. Myers: What'matter gives you most troubleP'/ 1

Mr. Parker: Mostly the statements of Ministers.

Mr. Myers: They disregard the instructions given to you? Mr. Parker: As a matter of fact I have had to get into touch with Ministers about statements of theirs.

Mr. Myers: And I think you are being prosecuted regarding a statement which has been published (in'another form) ;ifc the express request of Sir James Allen, Acting-l'rime Minister and Minister of Defence.

Mr. Parker: Yes. He went on to buy that every regulation or instruction received was circulated among the staff, and every member of tho staff, after reading it, was required to initial it. He had had to' refer several, instructions back to the authorities for interpretation, and on oiio occasion they were unable to say what tliey meant. He had on that occasion assisted them in discovering what the intention of the instructions might be. In view of the instructions received regarding this court-martial, ho did not consider that tho report of tho proceedings should hare bceu very carofully scrutinised!

To 31 r. Meredith: The report made by Mr. Gorman was looked over by one of tho sub-editors, Mr. Guorin, who also knew of the wish of the military authorities for Full publicity.. Witness had told Mr. Guorin to givo "a good run" to. tho report, and he presumed

that if matter was not to be published, | the Court would have indicated that at tho time. No doubt the reporter assumed that ho was at liberty to record the sworn statements of a witness given in open Court. Mr. Meredith suggested.,- that it would be of equal value to the enemy wherever it was made. Mr. Myers: But it is made publicly —in open Court! Sir John Findlay mentioned'a statement published with the authority and at the request of the Acting-Prime Minister and Minister of Defence. Mr. Meredith objected to this matter being put to the witness. Sir John- Findlay argued that as the Acting-Prime Minister and Minister of Defence had stated in Auckland that the warship '(name. given) was to arrive in New Zealand waters 111 a few days, the gentlemen controlling our Press were entitled to assume that they were, not -required to slick too closely by the regulations. Mr. Parker, resuming his evidence, said that, if the Anting-Primo Minister had given to his paner a statement of this kind he would'have .published it.

Atjout instructions from the Military

Ctiarie* Wesiwood Earle, Editor of The UoiiiMos,. said that in the course of a year scares of instructions wore received irom the Defehco Department, hi addition of regulations. Some ot these instructions had ■ to do with events of moment, and some with recurring' eyents and, one of the most difiicuk tasks of the sub-editor was to keep track of the changes made j in the instructions regarding recurring ovents. Always everything possible had been done to meet the wishes of the authorities. Producing a' bundle of telegrams, lie said: "If lour Worship could look through these telegrams we have received, you would see (the difficulties : wo experience iu carrying 'out the instructions we get. You would also see tho extent to which the Government appeals - to us to meet them in -matters, 'outside the regulations. You would see telegrams in which they ask us to do something which tbey had no right.to ask us.to do, but which we were only too glad to do to help them. Mr. Meredith objected to what he termed "this general harangue." "Mr. Myers;. Jl am assuming for the moment that tho regulation is intra vires, and ..I am showing that these newspapers have dono every mortal thing to assist the authorities,. and have avoided doing everything that might bo contrary to the desiros of the authorities, although they were often expressed in an ultra vires fox in. Mr. Earle: I am sorry, sir, that I have offended Mr. Meredith, but I tiniderstand from you ithafc in these proceedings'we were not strictly confined to the law of evidenced My intention was to direct your .attention to -the kind of -notices we received. Mr. Myers: Do you sometimes get instructions - in' regard to publication or non-publication 'from Major Lilley, Assistant Adjutant-General? 'Mr'.-Earle:'.Yes.. (He produced one such notice). ■ ; ■ .• ' Mr. Myers: I think you told us that you used evory endeavour to carry out the wishes of the authorities, whether you considered them legally binding or not? •'. . . Mr. Earle: Yes When we have doubts we are constantly ringing up Colonel Gibbon and asking his opinion. Sometimes he says "You can please yourself .about publishing.'• it/' and sometimes he says it is inadvisable to publish it. \ I don't thinl? there is a single instance in which his suggestion that it would, bo inadvisable to publish particular matter has been disregarded. Sometimes : we .have felt ! strongly that it was in the public interest that certain matter should be published, but wo have refrained from publishing -it., -.- ' ■. , Mr. Myers: And not contrary to tlie regulations? *Mr. Earle: Certainly not; I -am speaking of matters \ that aro not con-trary-to the regulations. - , , A Long Interval. Mr. Myers: This matter regard' to the was published in the "Evening Post" on March 10 at 3.30 p.m. What'time did-you publish it? Mr. Earle: We began printing at three'o'clock on Monday morning, "so that there was a lapse of 36 hours^ Mr. Myers: The authorities had the whole of Saturday night and Sunday to communicate- with you—if ■ thfiy thought'it objectionable? '' -

- Mr. Earle: We received no communication from the'authorities,' biit wo took the precaution of ringing ' up a member of the court-martial, 'Major Kirk', as to the accuracy of the report,, and lie. agreed that it was Accurate. It'was the first court-martial of the kind, and as a matter of public policy it was _ most desirable that it should, be-given full publicity, so .that the public and reservists might* appreciate' thei risks they raiiMiy ignoring their instructions. In this case it seemed to us most desirable that there should be ITO doubt at all as to the jjustice of the findings of the courtmartial. The whole strength of the case against this man depended 011 the fact that " he was attempting to , olear " off to - America.He was'' seeking to hoard the —— and' so escape: his obligation, and if that portion, of the report' "was sup- : pressed,, then the whole ease' against the matt fell to the ground. Assuming he. had been convicted lie might in tho eyes of the public be' deemed to have been sent to gaol-without justification, for the report would have contained nothing to justify the sentence.

A Pine Pclnt.

His Worship: You could have stated that he was about to leave, the country. Mr. Earle: Yes. We see.that now. All these fine points occur to us afterwards. . . V What hurts us is this— that all this time wo\ have' been .doing our best to meet the wishes of the authorities, we have gone further than they' have requested us to go .in" a great many instance;?, and then ..the law is strained to the utmost to get a conviction a'gainst those who have done their best tp help tliem. I . ' Mr. Myers: You are advised that the regulation is ultra vires, but you havo never Taised that tioint.

■ Mr. Earle: Not at all. -J was glad to hear Mr. Meredith say that generally the Wellington papers have observed the/regulations, because I think it is a fact that no other papers have .observed_ them so .well; . . . Scores of clippings from/other papers, in which breaches of the regulations have been made, have been held Vlp to our staff as examples of what to avoid.

"Farce From Beginning to End?"

Mr. Myers made a reference to a statement by the Acting-Prime Minister. , , v

Mr. Meredith objected to evidence on that statement. The only question beforo the Court was whether the statement set. forth in tho informations was a breach of tho regulations. All tho matters now being raised could properly bo mentioned, when the question of penalty was being considered. . Mr'. Myers: My object, sir, is to show the nature of the farce -initiated by the authorities. ' I can quito understand my friend's'anxiety to stop me if he can. I want to show that the persons who govern the" military authorities make statements to the Press, and ask that thev be publisher!—statements which are contrary to the Regulations—that in this case "the military authorities ask us to give' nublicity to a certain matter, and then, whon the thing is published, at-the absolute wish of the military authorities, published because the Kp.wapapers think thev arc ■ a public service in holping tho military authorities—this is the. sort of thing

with which they are met. 1 say that these proceedings are of a scandalous nature, that they should never , have been initiated, that they are a farce from beginning to end, and that, they aro bringing the wholo system intft disrepute.

Puzzling Instructions.

Mr. Earle was cross-examined by Mr. • Meredith. 1

Mr. Meredith: You thought this statement abtjut the man leaving the country was important.

Mr. Earle: That is the reason why it was published.

Mr. Meredith: Was there any necessity to name either the ship' or her destination?

Mr. Earle: No absolute necessity, bul it was a very emphatic point'in the case. Also, the ship had left the country ten. days before publication, and that svas a consideration which would no doubt- influence the sub-edi-tor. ' ' • Mr. Meredith:, Does your sub-editor suggest that he knows in'wbafwav any particular intelligence may be of use to the enemy P "• Mr. Earle: No. That is one of tlie reasons why wo felt'it. desirable to inquire about it, in ordor to conform with oiir'policy, and meet the regulations. Mr. Meredith: iAre not the only people calculated to know what value of shipping intelligence would he the naval authorities at Home? , • ; Mr. Eario: 1 can't say. that. I would | not take tho responsibility of putting j my opinion against theirs. • ] Mr. Meredith:. And if they requiro the newspapers to he silent on a point, you Would not burk th(iir wishes. Mr: Earle: We would not take the. responsibility if their wishes were clearly expressed; . . Mr. Meredith: There have been.occasions on which 'the Chief of. the General Staff has called your attention to matters to which he took exception. Mr. Earle: WJiat frequently happened was.this: ,Ho 'would say, ,"I am:.liot certain that you liava broken tho regulations", in publishing such- and .such a matter, but I ihink it would be advisable to leave it'out."' Mr. Meredith: Do you sayit is .the duty of tlie Chief of the General" Staff to telegraph to every paper in the coimj try'that- a statement in one paper must, uot be published in another? ' t • Mi'. Earle: It is just as much somt-. body's duty to point out this', as it is' our duty to meet them.in matters, outside the regulation's,. 3Jr. Earle pointed' out that it was difficult to follow always the instructions, because forbiddenmatters often 'occurred ■ in unsuspected places. He. instanced one case in which a statement had occurred in the'account of a wedding. Sir. John . Findlay: I think you had bettor get Mr. Meredith as'subeditor of your .paper. (Laughter.) ' Mr.'.Earle: I should like him to have a week of it. _ . Mr.. Meredith: You would get 110 shipping news. My plan iould bo to leave.out what was doubtful. ~ Mr; Earle: That- is our motto — "When in doubt leave out." 'Jo Sir John Findlay: The difficulty sometimes was to know wh at-th lations meant. Sir John Findlay: I don't know whether the Minister of Defence knows Hie regulations. . . '• ' • Mr. Myers : Nor the ccnsor, asl shall show presently., , x • The Case for the "N.Z. Times." v> Sir John. Findlay then opened the case for .the. "New ■ Zealand Times," indicating that the evidenco was much the samo as that in the other cases. Frank Herbert Morgan, sub-editor of -fneJ'New Zealand Times," staid that he and the staff, of the "Time's"'had done thein»best to observe the- regulations. The most troublesome matfer of all to deal with: was that in' Mini-sterial-statements. •••; ; ■ ~

The Duty of • Sir John Findiay,' addressing ilie I3(jiicl]j* saitl that lie wished first of all to uirect His-Worship's attention tothe very serious ' character ."'of- 'the charges made, i The penalty might be', a fine; of £100, or imprisonment for a period of one -yearr; "Now,' Your Worship,"'he/said, -"the- seriousness of the charge that is made imposes upon those responsible' for -bringing the charge' a degree 'of care which would' not' be necessary if the'authorities yere deal-' trig with a question of dog : registration or'of; allowing' one's chimney' to catcti fire.y These - publishers- are gravely brought before '"you on a- charge; upon which . you, in your good discretion, could send them..to gaol for a year, or fine them £100 each; My. first point is that when the. Crown hales a defendant before a court of justice charging him'with an offence so serious, the obligation lies upon-the Crown to see : that, the charge is a real one, that the offence is a genuine offence, that it,is a case in:wliioh punishment should be meted; out, V.a case with which, in the public interest or the public safety,it; is necessary to deal. The Crown have liere invoked a provision applying serious; ci imin'al consequences for' the act alleged, and ;thev have brought before the Court one of the most trivial and contemptible attempts to make newspapers doing; their: very best- ill these times of'stress.'liable to-heavy penalties. I appeal to. your experience, sir,—Have you ever known, a case so trivial as this now before you? Hero you have threa newspapers doing their best- to- obey the.: law, doing thenbest .to' co-opera te; with the authorities, submitting.to dictations to which they were not bound to submit, dictations which they could .treat with contempt if tlmy chose.., With . what result? When they .are ;to giv.e a full report -to . the. proceedings of a court-martial,; and . when' they, go out of their, way to fall'jn:with the wishes oF tlie:. authorities, . they are brought before the .Court to be.-punished. Your Worship,l : don't think I have ever -met'.!a -case where the desire* on the nart of one side to, comply with the law was met: with such a desire on Llie other side to.abuse authority. .. . . It is an abuse nf 3 authority unprecedented in New Zealand. i : .

Regulation UltPa Vires? 1

Sir John Findlay' proceeded to arguS as -to';.the--validity.-.of the regulations. His contention was that tils regulation under 1 which "tlio charge was laid w;as bad. . The. regulation ran that no person without the written consent - -of a'. ■ military ■ authority puoiisli i ijny - informatioii "as to the mpvements of - any ship, - engaged oi* about to be engaged in any'-voyage the course of'which'lies wholly-or partly to the north, of the Equator.?' His first point was thiit'this'was'"obviously far too va.ijue ; a prohibition :to. be enforced." hat' tSid- ''-any ship 1 ' mean? I! an American ?liij>" left- New York to . go to a South ..American port,'and one of tho Wellington papers announced the fact, the publication of. the hows would lie a breach : -of- the { regulations, although the ship 'might not carry one British subject or -an ouico of'cargo belonging to Britaiu or hor allies. Tho name "ship" might also be. applied to u very small vessel, even a yacht,, setting out to. voyago 1 by. easy, stages to the northern, hemisphere. . Such voyages had been made, but nnder these regulations wa6 it forbidden to mention' the departure from Wellington .of ■ a yacht on a voyage of this kind? Surely wheirthe liberty of the subject was at stake the subject had a. right .to know what he.was bound to do. The regulations were so framed a.i to give- tlio Defence authorities almost omnipotent power to.' come: down : on anyone'■ who transgressed .their will, whatever that will might People controlling news-' papers might-bo prepared to subordinate tlioir authority, but they were not prepared :to be bound to obey the caprices,of a- Department. If the Dcfonce people .wore going to control the

liberty of . the subject, let them do. it under regulations which "would allow every man to know what his duty was, and not by this method of (fragging an honest journalist into Court for breach. or a law-which was toowide ill operav ~.)ii to he obeyed or enforced. If the .illation was too vague,to bo under-!'„.-urid, or 50' wide, as. to lead to fantastic results,'as he contended it was, thea> the'regulation was bad; . Plea of Triviality. Mr. Myers said ho adopted' the ar--1 gumeut submitted by Sir John Findlay, by arrangement. "May I suggest toyour Worship," he -went on to say, "that there may be a simple way out. of this difficulty which will avoid thenecessity of . the Court having to consider the very important question', which has just been raised by Sir John-. Findlay, and by., myself. If I remember rightly, your Worship has power . under the Justices of the Peace Act to dismiss informations as trivial.. If yoyr Worship has that power, theni I venture to submit to the Court thaft never was there a case submitted to< this- Court where that provision could'., be more justly or more properly applied. It has already been brought out in evidence that this paragraph which is complained of was part of a report which was published at the'ex-, 'press request of the military authorities, and because the newspapers considered they were doing a service to the military authorities by ite very publication. I can't help again' putting to your Worship what I put Sat the course of evidence—that it is an. act of very great impropriety on the part of the military authorities that those proceedings should havo been brought: I would ask your Worship, ■therefore, if your Worship has power so to do, to dismiss these informations as trivial, and I .venture to suggest'toMr. Meredith that it is _ the best way 7, for the military, authorities out of-Ihe-present difficulty- I .say that for this reason—l lhay Ml your Worship that neither TnE Dominion or the 'Post' — ' and ,he. had 110 doubt the same feeling actuated the 'Tifnns|—-desired to be> forced into the position of contending that the" regulations were bad." TTis Worship: Had the question of .ultra, vires not- been raised -1 should hayehad no difficulty in dealing with, the case on the facts, but that miestion having been raised he would--have to give it'consideration. ' ', Counsel 'both said they would iwithdraw this contention if His Worship was of opinion that the facts w'ere_ such- ' as to'..warrant dismissal; of tlui infor'.mations as trivial.' -4lis. Worship did not dismiss t,Ve formations, y and Mr. Myers went on. with the argume®. He said a.caiu that the newspapers did not desire to attack the regulations., knowing. tittife this must embarrass :,the Government. Bu,t if. the authoritieswere embarrassed it was by. their own .act.- for thce; newspapers were being: subjected topersecution which was intolerable. He argued also that as the statement com- • plained of was hot per se, an indication' of- the movements, of a ship.,ib ■ did not come within the-regulations. . V .Prosecutor in Reply. • Mr.; Meredith, replying, .said thai/ his -'friends, wlnle; professing a wish ■ not to embarrass the Government, had, - in their conduct of the case taken everv/v opportunity of embarrassing. Leaving aside the question of whether-.' .the. regulation was intra or ultra vires, .. the. prohibition was against the recording of. the movements of any vessel giving north of the Equator. It was admitted that the-— 7— was going -to B:yi. , •Francisco, and -it -was not open ;to argument that the statement that'a::shjp> left Wellington, for San Francisco on a, certain date gave an indication of her 'movements. The object of the regula-- ' tions'jwas. to prevent the leakage of such information. Mr. Myers" had suggested, that; it was not an offence, be- " cause it was not a statement per so. If that argument were admitted, information could bo;given of every ship leaving New Zealand by introducing. , it m.some paragraph ahout something; else., The object of the regulation'was to prevent the publication of any information, -which, directly or in directly, _ might be of value to- the enemy. If information was given indirectly, the> effect yvas just the same as if it wer& given .directly.There had been evidence called to - suggest that this , in- . / formation had been published at tho wish of. the Defence Department. Such a defence was not tenable; • The only defence possible wopld be'that it-was published -with the written consent-of the military' authority specially appointed for the purpose—Colonel Gibbon. The Military Court, had rio powers. The officer, who asked the reporter to give a full report, presumed, no doubt, that the reporter would not put ' in any statements about, overseas snipping. ■ ... Plea of Invalidity. -It was suggested that the regula-' tions were ultra vires. He would suggest to the Court that-in these times, when the country was engaged in a. desperate struggle, the Court:must take, account; of the fact that the'regu-. lotions were emergency measures, taken in view of this fact.' The Court would, he suggested, be very- slow to take exception to the regulation, considering the object for which it was passed.He did not admit "that there was any; vagueness or unreasonableness about, the regulation. A further suggestion, had been made that the information; should be dismissed as trivial." This was _an even worse suggestion than the other. The regulations had been brought into force at.'the instigation o5 the British Admiralty! Sir/John Findlay: There is''ho proof of "that. L objeet to that-. It is done to try to buttress a_ Tvcak case. lam , quite sure the Admiralty would never have consented to regulations of tlrisi kind. ... ' His Worship: The question of where the regulations come from does not matter. , ■ • L Mr. Meredith: The responsible au- " thorities in New Zealaudi had deenied it necessary to bring these .regulations into force,'arid it is suggestedvthat a . breach of a regulation -brought into being for such a purpose could be dismissed by. a 'Court as trivial. v Sir John Findlay: The breach ig trivial.' _ r'. . Mr.: Meredith said that possibly the' breach was. inadvertent, or . that • it might.have beeu difficult to prevent; it.Those were questions affecting tlie penalty. If "the Court were to consider an offence regarding the' publication ' of shipping intelligence trivial at' a time. when New Zealand ships were being sunk, he did not know where 1, they would arrive. A breach of tho regu-t lation might be a menace to'the na- ' tional safety.

MAGISTRATE'S JUDGMENT.

' .NOT A ; CASE FOR A PENALTY.' . Mr. lleid said lie did not propose to ■dismiss the information as trivial. Ho .considered that tlio question of tho validity of tlio regulations was not one with which he ought to deal—it should go to a higher Court—and lie wild not express an opinion on it. Ho thoughtl tho case was not one calling for a pen* alty. No doubt the passage in the ovi« denoe of one of tho witnesses in the court-martial proceedings had crept in by inadvertence. Defendants would bo convicted and discharged. Mr. Myors intimated that none of the defendants would appeal on- tho question of law as to the validity. o£ the regulations.

Mr; Meredith"'then announced thnb' ho would call no ovidence in tho other cases, which meant, in effect, that they; were allowed by tlio Crown to lapse.