A CONSUL'S PRIVILEGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LII, Issue 215, 9 September 1921, Page 7

A CONSUL'S PRIVILEGE.

A rather peculiar position arose in a case that came before Mr. W. K. McKean, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court. It was in a dispute arising out of delay in the delivery of goods ordered from the United States. Mr. E. Inder said he had intended to call the United States Consul to etate the position of affairs in America during the period the delay in delivery occurred. The Coneul was willing to come to Court, and make a statement, but had intimated that as an Ambassador of the United States he was precluded from giving evidence on oath. The question was whether the Court was prepared to accept such a statement, and. if co, whether counsel on the other side wae willing for it to be accepted when not given on oath. Mr. A. M. Gould said he must have the right of cross-examination if the statement was made. Mr. Inder said if the Consul could not foe sworn he might object to be crossexamined.

Mr. McKean eaid he would hesitate to accept the Consul's statement if _he refused to submit to crjpFexamination. Mr. Inder then elected to proceed with the case without asking the Consul to attend.