MILITARY SERVICE ACT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CVI, Issue 16230, 28 March 1917, Page 4

MILITARY SERVICE ACT.

AND REGULATIONS TWiREUNDJiR LEGALITY QIIhS'IIONED. (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON ALaich 27 •Vifeumg bofoie the full Court m the sedition cases, 'in bupport of his contention that the Military Somro Act 101 C was btyond tho poWeis ol Pnili.vjnent as set out in the Constitution Act 1852, Mr Hutchison said Pailiamcnt <ould omy legislate for pea sons, within Now Zealand, and had no power to compel service abroad, lie said only the Tmpenal Parliament 'could give, by altering the Constitution Act, power to pass such a law. With regard to regulations made under the- War Regulations Act 1914, he contended 'that as they dealt ■with offences beyond the Colony they -were ultra vires. He also submitted that'the regulations purported to create a hew offence of "seditious tendency.;' This could not lie done, as sedition was defined by the Crimes Act 1908, ancl s\'ll seditious offences must be dealt'with tinder that Act. Regulations could not alter or vary tho Crimes Act. With regard to trial by jury, ho contended that the -War Regulations Act 1914 did 'not -exclude the right to trial byjury, but only excluded the necessity for "a presentment of an indictment. He analysed the speeches upon which the convictions were founded and contended-.-that they did not bear the construction put upon' them by the. Magistrate. Sir Robert Stout said the Magistrate would not; have been honest if he. Jiad come to any othef conclusion. Sir Justice Chapman asked whether, if it were possible for Germany to have paid agents and eloquent speakers in Now Zealand as she had done in Russia' and other places to try to weaken the military forces or undermine tho power of the .-Government,. Germ-iny would want anything better . for her pur-poses than the speeches under discussion. _. ■-.:'".'' ' ' . Mr Hutchison replifid tiat. it \Voiild have been better if' the" speeches had not been made* but what he was trying to do was to show "that the speeches did not offend against the regulations; that, taking a wide and. liberal view of the: speeches, the convictions, could not ■be sustained. ■ .;■■'; ■'..:.■ ■'-■ .'■'■'■' -■

The Court adjoiimod. ■ ti'l 10.30 sum. to-morrow, when, the Solicitor Geneva! will present argument on" behalf of the Crown.. ' .•='";;"■ '.\'"- '-' ':•