DEFENCE ACT AND DEFAULT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13350, 7 April 1914, Page 8

DEFENCE ACT AND DEFAULT.

THE. "SILENT SIX" AND OTHERS

SOME EXEMPTIONS GRANTED

(Per Press Association.) DUNEDIN, hist, night, j A large batch of defence cases * (170) were heard before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., in t'he City Police Court to-day. William R. Gillett asked for exemption from personal service. Counsel explained that Gillett and liis father were carrying on a dairy farm. Tlie 'father had become ill, and Gillett had to milk, I deliver the milk, and work on the farm I all day. He rose before 3.30 a.m., and did not finish at night till 7.30 p.m. Captain Hickey said that to exempt Gillett would form an undesirable precedent. The Magistrate said that apart from the father's illness there was nothing in the case to discriminate it from other-?. The father's illness, howev?r, made a difference. It would be a hardship if tho applicant had to attend camp. Exemption was granted till the end of the present territorial year (Mav 31).' ■.■■■-■■ Alfred George LicW-ry |18) also applied for exemption. '- Counsel said applicant was making a manly effort to assist his home. His mother was a widow and delicate, a daughter was earning 7s 6d a week. - Applicant, giving evidence, said he earned 10s, being indentured to i the bt3ot ti'&de, -and 1 £1 a week Avork- 1 ing at night at a picture theatre. The Magistrate said he thought this was a case in which the Act intended exemptio'n should be granted. The lad was working at night through sheer necessity. The application was granted for 12 months. Other applications were refused, including one from a son driving a cab for his father, and one from a student. The Magistrate remarked that there was nothing; special in the cases. A jarge number of men were charged with failing to render personal service. In one case it was shown that defendant, who 'had a very good record, had "had trouble in obtaining labor for his farm, and he had intended to resume at parades as soon as he could get labor. The Magistrate treated the case as an application for temporary exemption, and granted exemption until the end of th». territorial year. Jeremiah McKay said he had attend- 1 ed parades ih respect of which information was laid in. tlie case. Captain Sandle said defendant had attended parade, but had refused to obey orders. He was one of a batch. The Magistrate said tliat if they did not obey orders it was not a .parade. H. B. Martin, Stephen Jullany, Anthony Heffernan, John Fitzpatrick, Andrew Torrance, and Thos. AbercromSie were similarly charged and pleaded not guilty. Captain Sandle said that defendants were drilling, and were march-: ed down to tlie dark end of the yard, whero there was a fence. They were ordered to '-About turn," but did not obey, and started lacking the fence. Their drill throughout was bad, and at one time they started to sing "Here We go Gathering Nuts in May." All the men were good attenders, though one or two liad a- reputation for bad conduct on parade. Each defendant was fined 20s, with 7s costs. Albert H. BanwelJ, -who failed to appear, wa« charged with absolute disobedience while on parade on March 25. Lieut. Davis said defendant had a 'way of demoralising every parade, and had given a considerable amount of trouble. Sergeant-Major Dollimore said defendant belonged to a group who styled themselves "Tlie Silent Six." They were not silent, and were a nuisance to. the whole company. Banwell, when informed tliat he was to be proseciited, used a lot of strong language, knofru as the "Australian adjective." The Magistrate said the case was the worst that had come before the Court. Defendant was fined £3, and costs 7s. William Thomas Miller was also charged with failing to render personal service. His attendance at parades had been good, but the offence with which he was charged was stated to be worse than failure to attend, lie had failed to carry out certain exercises and thereby injured th© discipline of the whole company. He was fined 10s and 7s costs. Albert O. Turnbull was charged that h? left a parade without permission. A further charge was that he appeared in mufti. On the first charge he was fined 5s and 7s costs, and on thfc second he was admonished and discharged. Jas. Tourell, who had walked off parade, was ordered to pay Court costs (7s). Over 50 other cases of failure to render personal service were met by fines ranging from £3 and costs to 5s and costs,' and, in some cases, costs only. One cas© was adjourned, a doctor's certificate being put in, but not stating definitely that defendant was physically incapable of rendering service. Thirteen defendants were convicted and discharged. Richard Tramways . who addressed the Magistrate as "My Lord," pleaded guilty to a charge of having failed to register. He wiid he did not know .that he should have registered. Defendant was an immigrant, and had been in New- Zealand only a short time. The case was withdrawn. \ Francis Hugh Plunket asserted that he had registered when the Act first came into -operation, and had heard nothing further. He posted his registration form. Defendant further stated that he had posted another form on Thursday. The case was adjourned to give defendant an opportunity to make ''effective registration."' ■ "