FOUND GUILTY ON ONE CHARGE

Dominion, Volume 34, Issue 120, 14 February 1941, Page 8

FOUND GUILTY ON ONE CHARGE

Attempted Subversion

APPEAL AGAINST DECISION

Alleged Informalities

(By Telegnipli— L’ress Assoeiuliuu.)

CHRISTCHURCH, Feb. 13. Haruki Alexander Ostler and Travers Burnell Christopher Christie were found guilty in the Supreme Court today on a charge of attempting to publish a subversive statement. They were found not guilty by the. jury on a charge of publishing a subversive statement. Ou two other charges, that they had in their possession certain copies of the ‘‘People's Voice” with a view to facilitating the publication of a subversive statement and that they had in their possession typewriters, paper and material with a view to facilitating the publication of a subversive statement, Mr. Justice Northcroft ruled that the finding need not be taken. Ostler entered an appeal against the decision on the ground of certain alleged informalities in the preparation and presentation of the indictments (a matter mentioned at length in the first day's hearing at. the trial) and on the ground that his Honour’s summing up to the jury was prejudical tz> accused. His Honour asked in what part of the summing up was it prejudicial.

Ostler: I cannot remember your exact words, your Honour, but I think you referred to me as a person ot low character, or something like that. 'file Crown Prosecutor, Mr. A. T. Donnelly, declared that it was essential that there should be no misunderstanding as to what issues were to be reserved for the Court of Appeal. He suggested that the whole matter be stood over and that Ostler should be asked as well to formulate the precise nature of his objection to the summing up, that being the proper procedure. His Honour, agreeing to that suggestion, said that; it was his function to define what points of law were to be reserved for the Court of Appeal in so far as objection to the indictments went. He had taken notes on them, and would have them defined. His Honour adjourned the case till Monday at 10 a.m., telling accused that they were to have their objection to his summing up ready not later than then. The accused were released on bail of £lOO each, with surety of £lOO. Accuseds’ Statements. The accused, who conducted their own defences, did not call evidence. Christie declared that the fact that he was a Comtnunist was irrelevant and was brought in only to prejudice the jury. By refusing to find the accused guilty the jury would show a refusal to submit to methods identical with those employed by Hitler when he seized power and would strike a blow for freedom and the rights of democracy. His Honour Mr. Justice Ostler had said that comment made in good faith was not subversive, and he maintained that the comments in the paper which formed the basis of the prosecution were fair and even necessary in the public interest.

Announcing that he intended to refer to the definition of subversion given in a Wellington case by Mr. Justice Ostler, the accused Ostler said: "I do not quote this case because it happens that Mr. Justice Ostler is my fa ther, but because the points put to the jury by him are fuller and clearer than Mr. Donnelly has set them out. I do not want the fact that Mr. Justice Ostler is my father to affect the case one way or another.” "Might I suggest,” remarked his Honour, "that by such remarks you are in danger of prejudicing your own case.” Judge Sums L’p. His Honour's summing up covered some time. He urged the jury to consider the ease quietly and dispassionately, notwithstanding that the country was under the shadow* of a dreadful war, to consider it free from political prejudice and free from any terror which it might arouse in their minds. Justice should be ‘lone equally, too, notwithstanding the youthfulness and immaturity of mind of accused. His Honour discussed at length the contents of the "People's Voice’ involved in the charge. The paper appeared to be devoted almost exclusively to the propagation of the views of the Communist Barty, he said. The evidence fairly went to show that Christie could be inferred as being responsible for the production and issue of the number on August 8. The Crown placed considerable significance on Christie giving a false name when he took the typewriter to a city firm. The Crown also asked the jury to infer that Christie and Ostler were working in conjunction in Hie production of the issue of August S.

His Honour said that one paragraph in tile "People’s Voice'' was aimed at discouraging gifts to patriotic funds, claiming that it was a job for the Government. but Hie paragraph was wrapped up in continent on the conduct of tlie war itself. Another paragraph about it miners' strike on the West Coast amounted to propaganda encouraging unrest. and to that extent might be considered subversive. Other of the paragraphs might come within the definition of reasonable and temperate discussion.

His Honour asked Hie jury not to be led into Ihe thought that this was a political prosecution. Ostler's address had tended to be almost entirely political, aimed at exalting tlie Communist Party, and "to persuade yon that if yon do not intend to become members yon should at least .sympathize witli tlie party to the extent that yon should not regard its activities as subversive.” That was not tlie issue. Ostler had presented himself and the party to the jury in a somewhat lofty and dramatic way in tlie hope Hint possibly the jury would be distracted from its duty.

'l'lte jury, retiring at 3.13 p.m.. took till 8.13 p.m. to reach its decision after a dinner break of one hour and a ball.