COMMUNIST PAMPHLETS

Otago Witness, Issue 4042, 1 September 1931, Page 21

COMMUNIST PAMPHLETS

DISTRIBUTION IN STREET POLICE COURT PROCEEDINGS. AUCKLAND, August 28. A glimpse of the work of the Communists was revealed in the Police Court to-day when three men, one of whom admitted that he was “ group leader ” of the Communists in Auckland, appeared’before Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M., charged with dispersing papers without the name of the printer thereon. The defendants were Janies Henry Edwards. R. L. Lucas, and Henry Smith. Mr Schramm, who appeared for the three men, pleaded not guilty, stating that lie had a technical defence to submit. Constable Johnson, in evidence, said that when standing at a Street corner he saw Edwards distributing pamphlets. There were men picketing an hotel nearby and telling people who were going in that the house was “ black.” *’ There is a technical defence.” said Mr Schramm. “ I maintain that this is not a document that requires the name of the printer on it. If the name is required everyone who has a typewriter and prints a document would have to register it.” The magistrate indicated that in the case of Edwards there was doubt in his mind. However, he would reserve his decision. Lucas and Smith were charged with dispersing a paper from the workers’ unemployment movement without the name of the printer theron. “Again I maintain that this is not a document • that requires the printer’s name,” said Mr Schramm. “ There is sufficient compliance with the Act by the fact that the address “ Room E, Trades Hall,” is at the top of the pamphlet.” In evidence, Smith admitted that he had a typewriter and a duplicator at his home. Detective-sergeant Kelly: That is the headquarters of Communism in Auckland. Smith: Yes. You are the group leader for the Communists in Auckland City?—Yes. What wages do you get? Smith (with a disgusted gesture): Don’t be ridiculous. Decision in all three cases was reserved. August 29. ' The magistrate, Mr F. K. Hunt, in convicting the men to-day, said there was no doubt some of the papers were most libellous and seditious, and were calculated to do much harm. The men could not escape liability by saying that they had no printing press but only a typewriter. The minimum fine was £5. but he could fine them £5 for each copy up to 25. James Henry Edwards was fined £lO, and R. L. Lucas and Henry Smith were fined £5 each.