SEQUEL TO A RIOT

Feilding Star, Volume 9, Issue 3784, 30 July 1932, Page 6

SEQUEL TO A RIOT

Trial at Auckland COMMUNISTS INFLUENCE EDWARDS IN COURT HE GOES INTO THE BOX (I’er Pre s s Association) Auckland, July 2,9. The trial of James Edwards on, a | charge of taking part- in the riot °n | April 14 was continued in the Su- < promo Court to-day. i About 30 withrrs's, mostly police, gave evidence for the Crown, their evidence closely following; that given in the I ower Court and in other riot cages. ACCUSED GIVES EVIDENCE Edwards jvhu said ho was married, with eight children, said he had lio intention of creating trouble. Cross-examined, he .fluid ho was a member of the* Communist Party for about a year tund gave three addresses. The Unemployed Workers’ Movement regarded him a s a loader. The Labour Defence League was composed of men in all walks of life. The league, wag, liter the legal and financial protection of I “men iu an unfortunate position like myself.” Asked why he wont into hiding after the riot, said .lie knew from exponent-,- that in times of trouble tlio police always locked for those they considered leaders, particularly if they happened to be Communists. The Crown, Prosecutor-: But you had done nothing, yo-u say? Accused: That if, so, but I belonged to- a, party not very popular with the police- just then. Accused admitted telling the crowd that if they were attached they should crowd round the police and take tko batons off them. MOST DANGEROUS T VT3 E Summing lip, the Judge pointed out that the most dangerous type in the community might bo not a man who was openly violent, but the man who wp,s fluent with his ton-

gue, and perhaps saturated with undesirable literature, and who influenced bis fellows to take part in. such procirtjEhjpgk as those of April 14. There was ample oviderc- that Edwards war? associated with the procession that kiigfi.t, Dnd ,:iny.-le evidence that tiro rioting was not a sudden explosion, hip premeditated. In. such circumstances as arose, the police were fully justified in Using their batons, and if Edwards did as lie s:b<! ho did, urge these people to take batons from the police “and use no- violence,” then he was undoubtedly pucoiwaging a riot. What right had bo when the police were discharging their duty to encourage his im«n to seize tlieir batons * JURY DISAGREES The jury, after lour hours’ retirement, disagreed. A. new trial was ordered.