Abstract:
This paper provides a contextual analysis of the prosecutions of Robert Semple, Frederick Cooke, James Thorn, Peter Fraser and Thomas Brindle for making seditious speeches against the Military Service Act 1916, which introduced conscription into New Zealand. It seeks to provide a fuller account an oft mentioned but under-explored incident in New Zealand's legal history. This paper begins with a brief outline of the introduction of conscription in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. It then explains the defendants'
objections to conscription and canvases the content of their seditious speeches. It analyses
how the defendants' legal strategies evolved between their trials, in the Magistrates' Court,
and their joint appeal in the Supreme Court. Ultimately, this paper highlights both the
oppressive use of the War Regulations Act 1914 to suppress dissent, against conscription, in New Zealand during the Great War and the multitude of personal, political and legal factors that motivated the Crown prosecutions and influenced the judicial decisions in these sedition cases.
