JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 December 1940, Page 10

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES

ELDERLY WOMAN FINED [per press association.] CHRISTCHURCH, Dec. 5. “This Court has difficulty in understanding the mentality of these people. They are not being asked to go against their consciences when they are asked to be quiet in the meantime,” said Mr. E. C. Levvey, S.M., when a Jehovah’s Witness appeared in Court to-day. “Their pamphlets are the cause of f strong religious strife which is not good. Why can’t they do what other people are doing ■and deny themselves a little and be quiet until things settle down?” Margaret Messervy, a domestic, aged 60, of 160 Montreal street, was the woman charged (with participating in the activities of a subversive organisation), and Mr. H. S. Clark acted for her, entering a plea of not guilty. r'nncfnhlp p .T LT art. described what

he had seen in Bath Street on November 15. Mrs. Messervy had put booklets (entitled “Uncovered”) into letter boxes, and when approached she admitted everything, producing .14 copies of the booklet, all that were left of 30 she had started with. She was a married woman living apart from her husband. Detective-Sergeant F. Sinclair said that accused’s relatives had asked her to stop, but she had refused. The detectives had seen hundreds of copies of the booklet produced during their investigations. When asked by Mr. Clark if the accused seemed a sincere and conscientious believer, Mr. Sinclair said: “She’s a very stubborn old woman.” He would like the Court to know that if she had undertaken to stop, no proceedings would have been taken against her. Mr.« Clark, opening his address for the defence, explained that Mrs. Messervy had a bad heart and hoped to receive the age benefit soon. She was definitely against Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, and would have ceased her activities if she thought she was doing anything to hinder the war effort, but she felt she was not. Freedom of worship was the basis of constitutional liberty, Mr. Clark said.'and a recent Ministerial statement indicated that the statute was not aimed against an ordinary religious body, and for the accused her beliefs were a religion. “All I know is that there is a statute which I must enforce, and I cannot take notice of Ministerial pronouncements,” said the Magistrate. “Ministerial pronouncements are of no value in this Court.” . Mr. Clark submitted that the accused had merely committed a technical breach. “This Court does not want to be dragged into a religious controversy of any kind,” the Magistrate said to Mr- Clark. “Put it to her that she should be quiet in the meantime.” “I’m a British subject and I’ll expose the enemies of our Empire. . . ” she announced. “Tell her to talk sense,. Mr. Clark,” said the Magistrate. “I’m not prepared to cease. I’ll do what God tells me,” the accused continued. While Mr. Clark was speaking to his Detective-Sergeant Sinclair told the Magistrate that Mr. Me-

Fny, neaa ot tne organisation m Christchurch, had told him that none of the members intended to stop. “I’m sorry, sir, she won’t give in,” said Mr. Clark. “It’s all right, I can hear,” Mr. Levvey said. “She is being used as a tool, but she is a' very minor tool. Fined • £5, in default seven days’ imprisonment.” v