Old Enough to Know Better?

"No one in this country, however strong and sincere are his convictions and however honorable he may be, has the right to arrogate to himself to decide which laws are bad laws." Thus, to cries of "Shame" in London's Old Bailey last week, British Judge Sir Cecil Havers sentenced six youthful nuclear disarmers to prison. Their offense: an abortive attempt last December to organize a huge sitdown demonstration on the runways of the U.S. Strategic Air Command's nuclear strike base at Wethersfield, Essex.

All members of Bertrand Russell's Committee of 100, the six had hoped that the trial would serve as a soapbox from which to present their ban-the-bomb views. But painstakingly, Attorney General Sir Reginald Manningham-Buller (nicknamed by detractors "Sir Reginald Bullying Manner"), stressed that the issue of the trial was not the political or moral beliefs of the defendants, but the fact that in trying to crash the gates of the Wethersfield base, they had conspired to violate Britain's Official Secrets Act. Backing him up, the bench brushed aside the defendants' attempts to question witnesses on ethical rather than on factual grounds. One such witness was U.S. Scientist Linus Pauling, an ardent ban-the-bomber who had flown to London from California specially to testify on behalf of the defendants. When he was asked his views about civil defense, disarmament and nuclear war, Mr. Justice Havers ruled the questions out of order. Philosopher Bertrand Russell, still belligerent at 89, suffered a similar experience. "Do you feel people should disobey the law any time they want to?" Defendant Patrick Pottle asked Witness Russell.

"He cannot answer that," said Mr. Justice Havers. "His views on the subject are totally irrelevant to the case."

Before passing sentence, Mr. Justice Havers made it clear who he thought was the real culprit of the case. "It may well be that you came under the influence of Lord Russell, who is certainly old enough to know better than to incite young people to break the laws of this country." Then he meted out the stiffest sentences ever given in Britain for a civil disobedience case: one year in prison for the sole woman defendant, 18 months for each of the five men.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.