NO APPEAL ALLOWED.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 214, 10 September 1928, Page 17

NO APPEAL ALLOWED.

MR. NELSON'S DEPORTATION PRIVY COUNCIL'S DECISION. ARGUMENTS FOR PETITIONER. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, July 24. The Hon. 0. F. Nelson's petition for leave to appeal against his deportation from Samoa by the Administrator was dismissed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which did not call upon the counsel for the New Zealand Government. The Hon. Richard Stafford Cripps, K.C., and Mr. Lionel F. Heald appeared for Mr. Nelson. The' petition stated that Mr. Nelson was a British subject by naturalisation, and had been since 1923 the senior elected member of the Legislative Council of the territory of Western Samoa, to which office he was re-elected for a further period of three years on November 30, 1926, and that on December 15. 1927, the Administrator of Western Samoa (Major-General Sir George S. Richardson) served a summons, in which it was stated that the latter had reason to believe that the petitioner was hindering the due administration and executive Government. It was also stated that Mr. Nelson was head of an organisation called Mau, the purpose of which was to secure self-government, and by unlawful means to frustrate and ] render ineffective the functioning of the j Administration of the territory. The petition records the course of events to the final deportation order. There follow the terms of the Samoa Amendment Act 1927; the terms of Article 22 of the Treaty of Versailles, and the terms of the Order-in-Council. The Man "A League of Samoans." A full statement was given regarding the "development of the Mau. It is said "that in November, 1926, a subcommittee of the Citizens' Committee

was formed, consisting entirely of Samoans, for the purpose of examining the statements sent in by the Samoans and formulating suggestions as to matters peculiar t° the Samoans as distinct from those common to the Europeans and Samoans. "That the said sub-committee, without any instigation of assistance from your petitioner or the other European members of the Citizens' Committee, rapidly developed and grew in importance amongst the Samoans, and that those interested in its activities came to be known as the 'Mau. 1 That the word Mau in Samoan means 'opinion,' and the adoption of this term by the Samoans signified the holding of a unanimous opinion in favour of Administrative reforms, and that the Mau superseded the sub-committee and developed into a" league of Samoans. "The objects of the Mau were reduced into writing and approved by the Citizens' Committee on 19th March, 1927, and a document, setting .these out was Sent by your petitioner," as chair-' man of the Citizens' Committee, to tlic Administrator on 23rd March, 1927." Then follow the objects of the Mau. Vr "'Two Grounds of Appeal. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the decision and order i of the Administrator ought to be set aside upon the following two grounds: 1. That the Samoa Amendment Act 1927, which purports to confer upon the Administrator power to deport and exile British subjects, is null and void and of no effect as being ultra vires and New Zealand Parliament. 2. That even if the Samoa Amend-

meat Act, 1927, is valid and of full force, the decision and order of tlie Administrator ought to be set aside because there was a grave miscarriage of jostice in and about the making of the said order, and because the conduct of the proceedings and the grounds , for the decision of the Administrator were contrary to all established law and the principles of natural justice. As regards the first reason it was submitted—(a) that the Parliament ol New Zealand has no„ powers to make any laws for the territory of Samoa save in accordance with the terms of the Order-in-Council, which provides that the Parliament of New Zealand can only make such laws subject to and in accordance with the ' Treaty of Peace; (b) that the Treaty of Peacr J and the Mandate thereunder provide that the Parliament of New Zealan l shall legislate for the said territory an integral part of New Zealand and not otherwise; (c) that by reason of the New Zealand Constitution Act, 1852. (15 and 16 Vic., c. 72, S. 53), and tlic Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865 (2s and 29 Vic., c. 62, S. 2), the said Parliament has not and never has had any power to enact any law for New Zealand which is repugnant to law of England as existing at the date of the said Acts; (d) that it is repugnant to the law of England that any British subject should be deported or exile<i from England against his. will: (e) that the provisions of the Samo* Amendment Act, 1927, are repugnan to the provisions of the Order in Coun cil, the Mandate, and the Treaty ol Peace, and are contrary to the law oi England as existing in the year 184* and now, and are therefore ultra virer the New Zealand Parliament; (f) tba if the proceedings in this case befort the Administrator were authorised by the Samoa Amendment Act, 1927, tliet the said Act is ultra vires the New Zen land Government, as it provides a foriv of procedure which is contrary to est,all lished: law and natural justice, and i repugnant to the law of England an' the statute 16, Car. Ic 10, which is i> force in New Zealand.

Administrator's Decision. I As regards the second ground it wa t | submitted: That there was no evidence befon the Administrator that the petitionei was preventing or hindering the due performance of the Government of tht Dominion of New Zealand of its func tions and duties or the due administro tion of the executive Government ol the said territory as provided in seition 2 oi the Samoa Amendment Act 1927. That the decision' of the Administra tor was expressly stated by him as scout in paragraph 4 hereof to be inadt upon the ground that the petitioner had failed to disprove the charge again*, < him, and that it is contrary to' the terms oi the said .section 2 . and. to al i established law and the principles ofj natural justice that •an accused per sot' should be assumed guilty unless he car I prove his innocence. j That the Administrator failed to ir j form the petitioner either general! . or at all of the matters which had i» [ duced his belief, and denied the peti j tioner any opportunity of hearing tl: j case made against hinr or cross-exam-'

ining any witnesses or preparing any denial or explanation thereof contrary to the provisions of the said section 2 and all established law and principles of natural justice. The petition as it was filed contained three appendixes—(l) the written statement of the petitioner in answer to the summons; (2) a transcript of the hearing before the Administratorand (3) the Samoa Act, 1921 (sections 4, 73, 81, 83, 88, 96, 97, 100, 102, 211, and 349). "You have said all that can be said, Mr. Cripps," said the Lord Chancellor. "Their Lordships are unable to grant leave of appeal."