GAOL FOR RIOTERS

Hawera Star, Volume LI, 28 May 1932, Page 6

GAOL FOR RIOTERS

UP FOR TWO YEARS EIGHT GUILTY AT AUCKLAND TWO OF MEN ACQUITTED. FOUR TO BE RETRIED. (By Telegraph—Pres3 Association.) AUCKLAND, May 27. There was a tense atmosphere in the Supreme Court this evening when the trial of the rioting' charges aided after five days’ hearing and the late of the 14 atcused men became known. Ihe jury, which had retired at 1.40 p m., returned at 6.10 p.m. to report that it' had round eight of the: accused guilty of taking part in a riot oh the night of April 14, two not guilty and that'about the remaining four the jury could not arrive at an agreement. Mr. Justice Heidman pronounced sentence as follows on the eight men found guilty: Geoige Joseph Silver (England), labourer, aged 32, two years’ imprisonment with hard labour; George Devereaux (Ireland), labourer, aged 38, two years’ imprisonment with hard labour ; Simeon 'Mari' (Australia), labourer, aged 21. two years’ imprisonment with hal'd labour ; J allies YV illiam Rae Simpson (Scotland), labourer, aged 32, two years’ imprisonment with hard labour; Mate Dragovitch (Dalmatia), labourer, aged 33, two years’ imprisonment with hard labour; John Hubert Edwards- (England) salesman, aged 38, one year’s imprisonment with hard labour; Clifford John Dudson (New Zealand), labourer, aged 31, one year’s imprisonment with hard labour; Harold Robertson (New Zealand), labourer, aged 19, two months’ imprisonment with hard labour to be concurrent with the sentence he is now serving: The jury could not agree in respect of the following; accused: Oswald Boui - beau (Canada) waterside worker, aged 51; John William McCorkindale (New Zealand), miner, aged 37; William John Budd (England), seaman, aged 35; Albert William Searles (England), seaman, aged 25. The following were found not guilty and were discharged: John Sharpe (Scotland), miner, aged 36; Leo Martinovich (New Zealand), motor driver, aged : 18. The Crown was granted leave for a new trial of th© four men about whom the jury disagreed. The retrial v-uil take place at the next criminal sitting in August. It is stated the men aie Bill in custody. Tlie only comment attached to the findings was a recommendation fo mercy in the case of Robertson cn account of his youth. COMMENT OF THE JUDGE. “You men have been very properly convicted bv the jury of a very grave offence,” isaid his Honour. “This is one of the most serious cases that it has been my lot to try since I occupied a seat upon the Bench. I deeply regret that you aiid others have defamed the reputation of the country which has been, in days gone by, singularly happy and peaceful. “You may believe that you may successfully achieve some ill-conceived purpose by violence, but you will not. Sound thoughtful speech is a more po-' tent instrument than is riot. “To-day you will realise, or ought to Realise, where unjustifiable physical force lands you. For you it means weeks and months of isolation and disgrace. For your families it means misery and perhaps want. “When the happiness and peace * f the country are threatened by determined law-breakers the authority of the State is asserted a way that leaves no room for misconception. In the present instance the law ha:s been set in' motion and now you are witnesses of your own fate. I hope that the punishment I propose to inflict will make you and those who have been with you understand that a repetition of what took place on April 14 achieves nothing except an unpleasant experience in the criminal dock and the 'punishment and obloquy of imprisonment.

ADVOCATES OF VIOLENCE. “During this trial there was some evidence that there existed in our midst a sect which does not hesitate at violence, which is busy sowing the seeds of dissension, which aims at setting class against class, a sect whose activities can only produce unhappiness and strife. To describe such a body a learned judge in England quoted the following lines: ‘A sect whose chief devotion lies -in odd perverse antipathies.’ I am sure the authorities realise how necessary it is that such an organisation should be speedily checked.

“Before announcing the punishment that I propose to inflict I wish to associate myself with the observations made about the behaviour of members of the Police Force whose duty it was to protect the town hall when the attack was made upon it. Some were knocked to the ground, trodden upon and kicked. Some were so seriously injured that their lives were in danger. Even now it is doubtful whether some will ever completely recover. Their courage in the face of overwhelming force deserve the highest praise. What would have happened to those inside that hall had there been no police protection it is difficult to imagine. The police secured the safety of those who were there, and in the desperate position in which the police were placed gave an exhibition of tact and devotion to duty as will long be remembered by the respectable lawabiding citizens of Auckland.”