COURT-MARTIALLED.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume IV, Issue 1231, 22 January 1918, Page 5

COURT-MARTIALLED.

RESERVISTS ON TRIAL.

j WOMEN CROWD THE COURT.

Adjourned from Saturday morning '■ because of the refusal of the two aci cused to be medically examined for the purposes of the trial, a District Courtmartial sat in King Edward Barracks this moruing to try two reservists on charges of disobeying the lawful commands of a superior officer, in refusing to submit themselves for medical examination when called upon to do so. The District Court-martial was composed of Major A. J. McCredie, New ; Zealand Railway Engineers (president), ! Captain F. P. Osmond Smith, Ist (Canterbury) Regiment, and Captain F. H. [ Salter, Reserve of Officers. Captain 11. ! G. Livingstone appeared as prosecutor, ;as Major K. M. Gresson is absent on Military Service Board duties. WOMEN SYMPATHISERS. The attendance of the public was so large that many people could not find accommodation, and had to be shut out. Women predominated. Before the Court proceedings started, one woman aroused ! attention by loud-voiced calls for more chairs, and by talking of "poor old women" being unable to find seats. After the first prisoner had been brought in, another woman, by the door, rose and addressed the Court on the question of accommodation for the people who were outside, saying that she understood the Court was open to the public, and people could not legally be kept out. The president replied that the court was open so far as there was accommodation. When the woman attempted to argue the point the president declined to enter into a controversy, and intimated that if the woman persisted he would have to have her removed. Women in the court laughed at this. The president: If there is anything like that again you will all be removed. WARDEN ON TRIAL. The first accused was Charles Edward Warden, a clerk living at 83 Salisburv Street. When asked how he pleaded, Warden said he would like to know, in view of the position which had arisen on Saturday, whether the Court was legally entitled to proceed. He would like to have an assurance that the verdict of the Court would not be upset by any technicality. The president: I have been satisfied as to the condition of your health. The prisoner: Without a medical examination? Captain Livingstone explained, for accused's benefit, that although he (Warden) would go through this trial, a medical certificate would have to go ' with him to any prison or detention barracks. Warden: Oh, that's all right. Then I plead, my lord, not guilty. Captain Livingstone called Major A. E. Conway, officer commanding Group 9, who said that Warden was called up for service by a "Gazette" dated September 3, 1917 (the tenth ballot). A notice was sent to him to parade for medical examination, but he did not attend. Witness caused inquiries to be made for Warden, with the result that he found that Warden was an objector. On or about January 11 witness received a letter (produced). "THE COMING OF PEACE." In this letter Warden wrote that "in view of the imminence of peace I presume it is not necessary for me to trouble you again." He went on to offer himself for court-martial at anytime and place required, to save a " Gilbertian " arrest, saying that there was a certain amount of redundancy iu arresting a man who was ready to come up for court-martial when required. He made this offer to save others the pain of seeing him arrested. The letter added: "The approach of peace is now only a matter of hours, and foodstuffs have become the paramount question. I have written to Sir James Allen, and hope he will stop the removal of men." The concluding clause of the letter was, '' Trusting that news of peace will render your reply unnecessary." Continuing his evidence, Major Conway said that on receipt of that letter he sent a telegram to Warden, asking him to call and see witness. On January 14 Warden came to witness's ofiice, and after a conversation with him, witness gave him an order to be medically examined, which he told witness he could not obev.

To Captain Livingstone: The first order to parade for medical examination was sent by registered letter. Warden (to witness): When I interviewed you I made it clear to you that I was a religious objector? Witness: Oh, yes. To the president: Warden definitely refused to parade for medical examination. Replying to a question from accused, witness said that Warden was perfectly courteous throughout the interview. That was all the evidence for the prosecution. In reply to the president. Warden said he did not desire to give any evidence. The president: I must warn you that any evidence you give on oatli will receive greater consideration than any mere statement you may make. Warden: Thank you, sir; I don't think I shall require it. Answering a further question, accused said he did not intend to call any witnesses. PAYMENT OF FEU DUTY. Accused started to make a statement, in which he said that he objected to medical examination. Before proceeding, however, he handed in a document setting out his grounds of defence, in which he said that the Military Service Act was unconstitutional, unjust, and un-Christian. The order to parade was opposed to Christianity and could not legally be enforced by any Christian government. The methods of government were so useless to overthrow Prussian militarism that lie felt he must oppose them. He added that as a member of a family which in Scotland had continuously paid, anil was still paying, feu duty to the superior of the land, in lieu of military service, he was exempt from compulsory military service. He also claimed that he would be of more use to the eouutry, from an efficiency point of view, in some useful occupation than he would be on military duty. Warden went on to elaborate his defence, and tried to demonstrate, with an experiment, his views of the method* adopted by the Allies to overrhrow Prussian militarism. To the bottom of an empty circular tobacco tin he had fastened a bent metal tube. On the top of the tin he placed a sheet of paper, and showed that blowing through the tube only held the paper, by power of suction, on the tin.

Acc-uscd waudered so far in his statement that several times the prescient Jiad to warn him to keep to the point. Warden contended that the order to parade was not a legal one because it was not Christian, and therefore could not be enforced in a Christian country.

VERDICT OF GUILTT. The Court adjourned to consider its finding. On resuming, the president said that the finding was “guilty."’ Captain Livingstone admitted that accused was of good character. Accused handed in documents showing that accused had been employed by the Lyttelton Harbour Board for some ! considerable time, and bad given every satisfaction in his work. His services had been dispensed with because his views and intentions as to military service were not in accordance with those i required by the board. Accused also ■ asked that a letter which he had sent j to the Harbour Booard, expressing his j views, be taken as representing a statei ment in mitigation of sentence, i The Court was then cleared for the j purpose of the sentence being considered. The sentence is not promul- : gated until it has been confirmed by | the officer who convened the district , court-martial. THE SECOND TRIAL. Arthur Borrows, formerly a railway employee, living at 83 Tiiford Street, | Wool-ton, was then presented for trial. I Accused was assisted by a “friend,” jMrJ. H. G. Chappie. He pleaded “not | guilty.” ; Captain Livingstone said that acj cased was drawn in the twelfth ballot. , j Major A. E. Conway gave evidence I that Borrows was called up by a |“Gazette” dated November 6, 1917. I From information that came to witness, I he found that Borrows was a religious objector. Witness sent one of his staff to warn Borrows to attend for medical examination. Accused did not attend, and so witness had him brought to his office. On January 16 witness had a conversation with Borrows, when he told witness that he was a religious objector, and would not be medically examined. Witness then gave him a formal verbal order to be medically examined, which Borrows said he could not obey. Accused: Did I tell you that I was a religious objector?—l am almost certain you said “religious,” but perhaps it was “conscientious.” Borrows: The latter term is correct. I said I was a conscientious objector. No other evidence was called for the prosecution. Asked if he wished to give evidence, Borrows said that all his evidence went over much the same ground as Warden’s, and it evidently would be a waste of time if the Court would not listen to those grounds. He did not think that the Expeditionary Force Beserve roll was legal; it was founded on the census. Captain Livingstone suggested that accused should not allow Warden’s ease to influence him. AGAINST ALL MILITARISM. In reply to a question as to whether he wished to give any evidence, accused < said he was a conscientious objector, and was against all militarism. So far as the charge was concerned, he could not accept that he had any superior officer. “Therefore, to me, 1 have not done wrong,” he added. Accused was given every opportunity to cali_evidence, but all the prosecutor’s attempts to make him understand the difference between evidence and a statement were unsuccessful. At length Borrows said he wanted to call Mr J. H. G. Chappie as a witness. When a member of the Court held out a Bible to swear Mr Chappie, the latter ejaculated, “I don’t need that.” Ho made a declaration. Mr Chappie’s testimony was but a statement. He said he wanted to interpret Borrows’s mind to the Court; to show the reasons for his conscientious objection. It was pointed out that evidence could deal only with facts. If he j wished. Borrows could make a statement later, but a “friend” had no legal status in the matter of a statement. For a long time the president and the prosecution endeavoured to explain to accused, and his friend the difference j between evidence and a statement. The | difficulty was accentuated by Mr Chappie’s deafness. i Eventually Borrows was advised b»— his friend—who offered to bear the expense—to ask for an adjournment to enable him to engage a solicitor. Captain Livingstone also advised the adoption of this course. _ The president asked whether an adjournment to 2.30 p.m. would suit accused. “Oh, let the thin on.” said accused. “It’s only a waste of time. I’m fully convinced everything is cut and dried.” Captain Livingstone suggested that accused should state definitely what adjournment he would like, so that the Court would consider it. Another period followed in which accused and his friend showed their inability to distinguish between evidence and a statement, and in which Mr Chappie made statements of various kinds depreciating the proceedings and alleging that there was no justice in the Court. At length Borrows withdrew his application for an adjournment. When Captain Livingstone suggested an adjournment for lunch, Borrows objected to that. The Court, however, adjourned. When the Court resumed the president said that the evidence of Mr Chappie was closed. In reply to the president, accused said he had no other evidence to call and nothing to say. The Court was closed for consideration of its finding. The adjournment was very brief. On resuming, a verdict of “guilty” was announced. Asked if he wished to give any evidence in mitigation of sentence, prisoner replied: “I don't wish to mitigate sentence. My conscience is as clear as my past record is.” Borrows added that he desired Mr Chappie to be heard. The president: The time for Mr Chappie is past. Prisoner (to Mr Chappie): You’re not allowed to say anything. Jumping to his feet. Mr Chappie asked: Have I no right to speak in mitigation of sentence. The president (in a stentorian voice): Silence! The court was closed for the sentence to be considered. After the court was closed a large number of the women who sympathised with the prisoners marched out of the barracks, singing “Keep the Red Flag Flying.” and gave cheers before they dispersed.