THE DEFENCE ACT

Evening Star, Issue 15513, 8 June 1914, Page 5

THE DEFENCE ACT

' A CAFTAJN &$D HIS MEN'. AND A HALF-DAY PARADE. Tweh» cleaners in the railway service named Herbert P. Keen. William Agnew, John S. M'Conibe, Gilbert 0. Nelson, David C. M'Coanochie, Peter A. M'Laren. Junes French, Irvine S-. D. Bilscn, John hj. West, George- W. Leathby, James dayton, and Douglas J. F'cld were charged in the Polio* Court this morning with failing 10, render personal service under tha Defence Act. Mr W. C MacGregor appeared for all the defendants, who pleaded not guilty. Captain Hickey said that the defendants were «U railway servants. They were cabled cut for parade one morning, and marched to the tram terminus at North' east Talky, where, in order to give them a r«st, they were dismissed and told to fait in again in about 10 minutes" time. Th*. defendants before the Court got on a traiacar and went home. They were spoken to by the company's commander, who called on them to come out of the car ►nd fall in again, but they absolutely reiueed to do so.

Hamlin Thomas said he was a railway emelojee commanrling No. 6 Company. The half-day parade was called for the| 28th May at the Garrison Hall, and the, men were taken for a route march to the] NortlMwt Valley terminus, where they were dismissed "for 10 minutes, being j warned that they had to fall in again, j Certain of them got on the car, and were ■warned tliat if they did not fall in their name* would be taken. Sergeant McGregor was despatched to tell the men to fall in. lbs reported that they declined to fall in. Hkirder to avoid trouble witness went and fft the men to fall in, but they absolutely jflined. \l<rasß-examm«i by Mr MacGregor, wit's admitted that some of them had not kreived but notice to attend the parade. ] •'His Worihip: If they received no ordersj low did thev come to be on parade. j Witness: They cam* up under standing #rdm fee 10 o'clock parade. Mr Mac/Sregof: That is so. Captain Hicker: Notice.or no notice, ibey were on parade., and refused to obey, jour orders? Witness: Yes. , Mr MacGregor: That is a question ot cw. Sergeant McGregor gave corroborative tvidence. ~ , In reply to Mr MacGregor witness admitted that those who remained on parade were dismissed after they were marched sbout 10vd3 further. Evidence was also given by Nergeantreaior Dallimore, who said that certain men who had to go back to work were dismissed. Captain Thomas had stated on parade that it was a half-day parade. Captain HickeT laid that the point of «he defence seemed to be that the defend-ai-ts did not get an order that it was to he a half-day parade. Whether it was a half-d#v parade or not. once the men were on parade they must know that they had; to obev the order® given. There- might be another point raised, and that was that the young fellows had to get back to work on account of their being cleaners. From the Teports received from the railway authorities it was clear that the defendants had far more time at then- disposal after the parade was over than was required by the regulations—that was eight hours. The Bailway Department did not mend to take any action in the shape ot punishment on the men if they were convicted. These men all belonged to one department, and, as far as be could see from the reports, they were an organised body who had made up their minds to give as much trouble as they could, not onlv to the officers of their own department, but to the Defence authorities. Two or three seemed to lead the others. He asked for the maximum penalty, to make them realise that they had to obey orders. Mr MacGregor 3aid that- the •prosecution was a mistake, and should be dismissed. The position wa3 that the men | jrere charged with a breach of section 51 of the JSQ9 Act, which stated that every .person required to be registered who failed to do so,, or who without lawful excuse evaded or failed to render personal service, was liable to be fined. That section *as amended and to some extent enlarged bv section 55 of the 1912 Act, and • the Court also had to look at section 25 of tho 19G9 Act to show what was the obligation on persons to be trained. The training, it stated, should be in each year as prescribed. '* Prescribed" meant either by the Act itself or by the regulations. The regulations prescribed the) training under the Act. The regulations were to be found in the ' New Zealand Gazette.* Regulation 226 stated that parades and drills were to be> notified to the men, and that programmes showing 'times and dates of parades were to be issued in advance- The programme further was to be arranged as far as possible to *uit the convenience of employers and local conditions. On the 18th of May, the date on which this offence was alleged to have been committed, the young fellows complied with what was known as the "blue standing orders" issued to them, which 'notified them that they must attend the parades which they had been attending for months past—-simply parades <>l Xi hours' duration. They attended the Garrison Hall *t 10 o'clock, in accordance with this notice to attend one of these asual parades. They were then marched north until they reached Normanby, where ;hey broke off "for a rest. By this time it was after half-past 11—the hour at .which iha parade should have expired. They asked the captain how much further they had to go. Then he told them that they had to go on for another hour—that it was a half-day parade. That was the first notification they had received that it was a, half-day parade, and they told the caot*m that they bad not. received notice of it. As a matter of fact they got the notice that it was a half-day parade when they got back to their work that night, so that they could not comply with the notice. Counsel therefore submitted that no offence had been committed. He suggested "to the Defence Department that they should not have rushed the young fallows into court as criminals before taking steps to find out whether they 1 were guilty or not. Captain said that as they were on parade they were bound to comply with any order the captain gave. H that was so, then the captain could have kept them there a week if he had chosen. The position was that the men were notified to attend a- parade of lj hoars 1 duration- This same matter had engaged the attention of the Full Court in the case of Dempsey v. Furness. Mr Justice Cooper and Mr Justice Chapman were quite clear in their decisions on the point that a man required to attend was not guilty of any breaeh of duty until he had had notice to attend a particular camp at a particular time and had failed to do so. The position was the same in this case. The men bad to reeeiv*.._. notification. Captain Hickey said that section 95, part 13, clearly laid down that orders given Terbally on parade would be effectual and valid. Mr MacGregor said that he argued that the orders were given not in authority, and in defiance of the Act. The men w«e not bound to obey, as they had been trapped to a certain! extent. The parade had exceeded 1£ hours, and they thought it was time to atop going on, as they had received no notice of a half-day parade. It might have been that they would have fy|W better «dvised tc. have completed the parade and then have complainedBi« Worship (Mr Bartholomew) jnti--raa*e€ that be, would take time to consides the case, and would give, judgment oa Monday afternoon.