Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE RICHARDS CASE.

To the Editor. Sir.—The extraordinary action of the Auckland Magistrate in refusing exemption from military drill in the Richards case should not be allowed to pass unnoticed. On what grounds did the law dispenser base his decision? Mr Richards had been fined several times before for refusing to violate his conscience. The representatives of his church testified to the genuineness and sincerity of his convictions as a conscientious objector, and yet, in spite of all. the Magistrate says his case is not a bona fide one. Were the scales of justice held evenly in this instance? Assuming that the necessarily condensed Press report gave us the essential details, it is difficult to think so. I should not like to think that the administration of justice in our land was behind that of other lands, and therefore this case of apparently miscarried justice should be brought under the notice of our legislators. Courts of law and the administration of justice are of such vital importance to us that any seeming departure from their high ideals warrants the closest investigation.—l am, etc., R. DALMER.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19280430.2.43.1

Bibliographic details

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18451, 30 April 1928, Page 5

Word Count
185

THE RICHARDS CASE. Star (Christchurch), Issue 18451, 30 April 1928, Page 5

THE RICHARDS CASE. Star (Christchurch), Issue 18451, 30 April 1928, Page 5