FINED £100.

Auckland Star, Volume LXXI, Issue 148, 24 June 1940, Page 3

FINED £100.

CONTEMPT OF COURT. APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED. A PUBLISHER'S OFFENCE. Charged with contempt of Court in the publication of an article in a paper the '-People's Voice," having reference reflecting on the administration of justice, Oliver Bennett Young Gregorv •Iwcribod as publisher of the paper, came before Mr. Justice Blair in the ■Supremo Court to-day. Through his coiinee , Mr. Hogben. the defendant filtered a pica of guilty, expressed ivgret and offered an apology. Defendant was convicted and fined £100 and five guineas costs with the alternative of nine months imprisonment in default of t.avment within one month. * ! Mr. V. H Meredith, for the Crown, said the nunilier of the. paper to which exception was taken was printed in Auckland mi May >2 y i ssl ,ed in Auckland on May 23, »yid in Dunedin on May -i. vn May 24 two men came before the Court on (wrlaln charges, having been served summonses on May 20, and in the. article complained of comment was made respecting their prosecution. reflectmg on the administration of justice. On April M the then publisher of "J he People's Voice" was the subject of proceedings for contempt of Court. He tendered an apology and was ordered to pay costs. On May 1 the publisher of the paper was changed to Gregory, and lie must l>e assumed to have a knowledge of the previous case and of the seriousness of the offence. Mr. Hogben said he was instructed bv his client to express regret and offer ail apology. Counsel contended that the actual contempt consisted mostly of the use of the word "persecution" in' a heading, and was more academic than substantial. Gregory had taken over the position of publisher on the former publisher and proprietor being convicted an the. result of proceedings in the Magistrate's Court. He had no knowledge of the paper's contents urA relied on the literary staff. He had had no previous newspaper experience. In reply to his Honor counsel said the defendant was 31 years of age. Counsel added that this number of the paper was the last one of the "People's Voice," as steps had been taken to haw the puper suppressed. Mr. Meredith submitted that the matter could not be dismissed as siti academic breach. A flagrant attack was made on the administration of justice. His Honor said the law was that the publisher undertook the responsibility. The person who disseminated th<: poisonous doctrine charging the court with unfair administration of justice committed a grave offence. Defendant should have known what - he was doing. He would be fined £100 and live guinea? costs; in default of payment within one month a term of nine months' imprisonment.