CHARGES DENIED

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 72, 26 March 1941, Page 11

CHARGES DENIED

ALLEGED SUBVERSION

' A STREET MEETING

ACTION BY POLICE

The secretary of the Christian Pacifist Society, Archibald Charles Barrington, aged 35, appeared before Mr. J. H. Luxford, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court today, charged with conducting, on March 21, a meeting prohibited by >the Superintendent of Police, with attempting to publish, on February 21, 'a subversive statement, namely, a !cyclostyled document entitled "Defend •Peace and Freedom at Homey with a subversive leaflet with a Jview to facilitating the publication of fa subversive statement, and with publishing a subversive statement. After \ evidence had been heard from several [witnesses, who were questioned at length by, the defendant, Barrington pleaded not guilty to all charges, and ■was comxmtted to the Supreme Court for trial. ■iS.Mr,. C. H. Weston, K.C., with him Mr. W.-K. Birks, appeared; for the Crown. Barrington was not represented by counsel.

Defective S. C. Browne said he knew the defendant, who was the secretary of/the Christian Pacifist Society. On March 1 last he interviewed him regarding a circular entitled "Defend Peace and Freedom at Home," a copy of 'which had been received through the post by the Superintendent of Police at Wellington. Barrington said that he personally had sent it.

Detective Brbwne read to the Court the circular, which referred to a proposed meeting on March 7. The defendant explained, he said, that he had been unable to obtain any newspaper publicity for the proposed meeting on March 7, that he had nothing to hide, and that he thought it was only right that the Superintendent should know that the society intended to hold meetings. He said he had written the notice and cut the stencil, but had not personally turned the handle of the duplicating machine. Two lots of circulars had been put out, he said, one of about 400 and the other slightly less. They had some further discussion about the proposed meeting. Mr. Weston: Did he say it would be held whether prohibited or not?— Yes.

"WHATEVER THE CONSEQUENCES."

And whatever the conquences might te?—Yes, whether it led to imprisonment or not.

On March 4, said witness, he served on the accused a notice prohibiting the meeting.

On March 21, at 8.5 p.m., said witness, he was present, with other officers/in the Manners Street Reserve. At that time Harrington mounted a box, and between 20 and 30 persons gathered round. Many of the persons were known to witness as members of the society.

Barrington stood for about a minute •without speaking, said witness, and then said "Christ came into the world about 2000 years ago and by the way He lived and died He showed us the ■way-to ■ live and the way to die." He said, "He came into a wprld very similar to the world in which we are living today." At this stage he was approached by Superintendent Lopdell, who spoke to him

Detective Browne then described the events which led up to the removal of the defendant by the police.

Mr. Weston: When he was taken away,' did anything happen?— Yes, there was a bit of handciapping by members of the audience.

Did the Rev. Mr. Burton do anything?— Yes, he led the clapping, and called out, "Well done, Barry."

Questioned by Barrington, witness said that he had never had any difficulty in getting from him any information he wanted.

You regard our proceedings as perfectly frank and open?— Yes, you. have never attempted to hide anything so far as your activities are concerned.

Witness said he had no knowledge of any wholesale distribution of the circular. He thought he remembered the defendant saying "Christianity has often been prohibited, but never successfully."

Superintendent C. W. Lopdell produced a delegation of powers, from the Commissioner of Police to himself, under the Public Safety Emergency Regulations.

Prior to March 7, he received the circular, already produced, -he said. It gave information of a meeting which was to have been held at the Trades H,all on March 7. On examining the circular, and deeming that the meeting referred to was likely to be injurious to public safety, he prohibited the meeting. On the night of March 7 he was in Vivian Street, near the Trades Hall, when the Rev. Mr. Burton was introduced to him. He said no meeting would be held in the hall, but that one would be held in Manners Street. He asked him if he were speaking on behalf of Barrington and the Christian Pacifist Society, and he said he was. Mr. Burton said there was no need for the show of force that was apparent by the number of police, that there would be only one speaker, there would be oitt? arrest, and that would recur each Friday night.

Afterwards, said witness, he went to the Manners Street reserve, where he found a man named A. H. Carman speaking on behalf of the society. He was arrested. The Rev. Mr. Burton was also present. On the following Friday night, about 8 o'clock, the Rev. Mr. Burton and others were at the same place. A man named Woodley got up to speak on behalf of the society, refused to cease, and was arrested. On the next Friday night the Rev. Mr. Burton was again there, and the defendant, Barrington, got up to speak. After he started to speak witness and Inspector Sweeney approached him, and witness asked him if he were speaking on behalf of the Christian Pacifist Society. He said to Barrington: "I prohibit this meeting," and Barrington asked on what grounds. Witness said: "Under the Public Safety Emergency Regulations." Barrington then said loudly: "This meeting is prohibited under the Public Safety Regulations." He proceeded to say something else, and Inspector Sweeney asked him to cease. Witness also asked him to s*op, but he said: "I will continue." He was eventually arrested. . "CHRISTIAN GATHERING." Defendant: Do you often have to prohibit Christian gatherings?—No, I don't think I have ever had to prohibit any. You don't regard the meeting in question as a Christian gathering?— No, I don't. Witness said that he would not question that the Christian Pacifist Society was cpmposed of Christian men. Would you agree that your action in regard to prohibiting this meeting constituted a denial of Christian liberties? —Probably it did. Witness was questioned by Barrington as to his reasons for deeming the meeting as one likely to prove injurious to public safety, but the Magistrate said that the action of an administrative officer could not be challenged In a court of law unless it was alleged

that he acted from dishonest or spiteful motives. Barrington said he did not suggest for a moment that this was the case, and there was no further questioning along these lines.

Witness said, in answer to Barrington, that he understood that the scene of the meeting was the spot where the Christian Gospel was first preached in Wellington. He could not say whether or not indoor and outdoor public pacifist meetings were still being held in England.

Sergeant J. Jackson also gave evidence of events at the meeting.

Barrington did not give evidence, but made submissions as to whether or not a prima facie case had been made out against him. He would like to suggest, said the defendant, that, so far as the passages in the circular were concerned, they constituted a perfectly proper question for a citizen and for a Christian, and that there was no interpretation of the Regulations which would make it impossible for citizens and Christians, at any time, to say: "We think the war should stop."

The Magistrate pointed out the effect which might be made on the war effort if a substantial section of the community took the view expressed in the pamphlet. Defendant: You are not suggesting that this is a product of Nazi propaganda?

"NAZI PROPAGANDA."

"Unfortunately, it operates as one of the most powerful features of Nazi propaganda," said the Magistrate. "That is why the law has been enacted, to ask people, no matter how sincere their feelings, to desist while the national danger exists." In England, where similar regulations existed, continued Barrington, pacifist publications were being freely distributed, and pacifist meetings were being held in halls and public parks. That was peculiar, in view of the action taken in New Zealand under similar regulations.

The method adopted in another country of enforcing the Regulations was not relevant, said the Magistrate. Defendant: I 'fully appreciate that you should administer the law as you find it. '

The Magistrate: I don't find it difficult.

"I would not like to think that the Regulations were designed to prevent the free assembly of people reasonably to discuss and put forward, all points of view on these matters, and I cannot believe, either, that the Regulations were designed so to prevent Christian societies such > as our own from meeting and going on with their proceedings." said the defendant. "It will, I think, be a very grave breach of religious, as well as political, liberty if these charges are held to be reasonable charges, and the interpretation of the Regulations on which they are based is held to be a reasonable interpretation."

Barrington was allowed bail on giving an undertaking that he would not take part in pacifist activities pending the holding of the trial.