SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 57, 30 November 1907, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

.CRIMINAL, SITTINGS. Tho- Court rosumed I: its : sittings yesterday norning, His Honour - Mr. Justice Cooper uking his seat at lO 'o'clock. MANAKA'TJ-CASE; V / SENTENCE OF TWO'YEARS. ; 1 Wnka Waka Hepere, a lad, who on Tuesday was found guilty o£ having at Manakaii indecontly nssaulted a girl aged fifteen years,, was -set - forward. I ''*-' ' ■Evidence as to'character was 1 tendered. Mr.' Wilford aske'd His; Honour to deal 1 s leniently as possible with'-tho' prisoner. ' His Honour: It is ' impossible to givo prisoner the benefit of the Probation Act, seeing that the offence-of which'he'has been fouu I guilty is a very serious one, and that ho was " convicted on the clearest "possiblo evidence, llad prisoner been younger, I should havo \ ordered a whipping and sentenced him to a short term of impnsonmont. I-do not thinK ' that a youth of -his; age should, bo flogged. The surrounding circumstances in. this case* are such, as : to render it impossible for. mo tJ allow him to go -without punishment. : Young lads, even although ; they are of industrious habits, are sometimes givon to libidinous eonduct.-- -Girls must be protected against Maori as well as English youths. Ono dislikes (to send a comparative-youth to prispn, but 1 one must do .one's duty to. the community. ' I. sentence prisoner ■ to 1 two • years imprisonment with hard labour. No . doubt the authorities will see that.ho is kept as much as • possible from ..intercourse with persons, older in crime. ' , ALLEGED DEFAMATORY- LIBEL. A' "CIVIL SERVANT'S' REPUTATION. Arthur Beeson " was charged _ under the "Criminal Code of 1901 (which is a re-eriact- - ment'of the provisions of Lord Campbell's Act} passed in 6 and . 7 Vic.) with having uttered'a dofamatory libel. The text of the . indictment was as follows: —- That you, * Arthur' 1 Beeson,did. publish to ono Peter Heyes,'Superihtehdent of the Government' Advances to Settlers Office,' a defamatory libel lof-' and concerning William 1 James Pollock, of the City of Wellington, clerk, such defamatory libel being in the following words;— ■/.; : ' " In reply to .your letter of tho 13th instant, .1 charge W. J. Pollock,, a clerk in your ; Department,' wit-li, ''. . [Here follow, definite /'charges,. "'of. f "grave .. biffeiices against' The . charged against.; Pollock' were attended .by circumstances-of the .'most .revolting'.' brutality, heartlessriess,' and - cowardice./' 4 Pollock.-.when sued' .for : ,the support' of' two illegitimate : children (twins), was'ordered to pay £200! .1 need not say that'the honour of the Civil Service wilt demand a searching inquiry sis to tlio truth ; of 'these, charges. I respectfully _ request, before ! such inquiry be held, an interview with' the. Minister in charged of the Department!"';',-.': ' Prisone rpleaded "\Not Guilty," and'filed a plea, in the course of which' he stated that the;-;'alleged, libel, was . true, ...in -substance and in ' fact, -arid before .and at the tiime of publishing the said.alloged libel, it for the public benefit that the matters charged should be-published in the manner and !at ,tho time when they'were published,, because;., the said .' William . . James . Pollock then, was, a. member of 'the Civil Service of New 5 ,. Zealand, and was. employed in a Department' of State, and because it. was of . theV'greatest consequence to determine whether a person who had committed the mmes/'and offences charged was a fit and 9ro^r,; : person to ,bo a- member of- the said DiviLScrvice, and to .be employed, in . a Department .of State, • and tliat !ah inquiry mi.sht bo held, into the truth or falsity of the Rftia.. .charges, wherefore lio, ;.(tho prisoner), beiiijg; aware of,,'£KeVpremises,.. ajid";bejabyiiig it .-to he 1 his duty to acquaint thor-heaclj-of the : said Department w,ith the facts as "to the conduct of the said William James Pollock,, and being invited so 'to do' as a matter of duty .by a citizen of Wellington interested Civil. Service, -.published the.said, alleged, libel-to-.Peter Heyos,f.±he head of and as.,- such interested therein in, order, that,the said charges should be inquired into, -and he (the. prisoner) "in noway published the alleged libel save to the said Peter -Heyes, wheroforo he (the pnsoner) said it was for the public benefit that the.matters charged in the alleged libel, ii'i , l ! eyery-,.!)f them, should be so published by him"arf 'aforesaid, and this he was" ready to verify,. r wherefore he prayed jnfement and that by.the Court;lie might be dismissed and' discharged from the premises in the indictment -above specified. tr^SS. 0 rppJ " !iition the (instructed by Mr. J. J. M.Grath) prosecuted, and Mr. Gray appeared for the-prisoner.. , • W&K 1, /J ring wns enl P a nelled.—John ri t^ th u (forem T an) ',; W -' H - M - Eason, J. r Petor & ' Cairns,' - TLf=+#u \?R', °«'en Coleman, -Robert TuiJl, Matthew MNamara; Wv Patterson; Ja's. W. lellingham, and Hans Anderson. : , ,lford briefly: outlined.the facts relied He pointed out that, under. the ■ Criminal Code ■ Act, -1901, 'if' a defamatory-libel were.publishod it was competent for the it to justify thp'Mibof rml * i ■ ma^er contained in the .libel-was-triie,'and'that it was for the shoulrr hn De tr W . tlle , matters charged U bo Published -m th 6 manner and at the-.-timo when they were published. - It was 2nlv S S H, er 0re I for ' pnsoner t0 Prove not rl the ,T w , Bre true > but that it Wn- -»')^ e P., ulj ' lc . bon efit that the lotted had n ' - Pr,soner ' who ' hilcl not resided m the Dominion more -thin ; five or six " 0 ," v :P " 0r to the date.iij,question, had not the ietter, but had also taken 1 the .pulpit against >the prosecutor. He (counsel), understood that: Christianity was ; H *r--tho .parson made: it his text that ,4-week, .and he said a i! l i C f hi ? h '? lla 'f' the truth' is ever the _ blackest of . lies." _Contmuing, Mr. Wilford mentioned, inter anai tnat prosecutor married in 1898, but that his.,.ivitc clicd this ; -^eter'.-Ileyes,..Commissioner of Taxes and bnperintendent of the'-Advances, to Settlers P'hce,i gave evidence that prosecutor was, on < the date in guo6tioii,.an-qniplo.yee :iii the Department. The letters produced (dated June 10 and 18) were addressed to hini; and were m tile .handwriting of prisoner. In consequence of what was."contained in the second letter,-lollock was asked to resign, which iio had done.

witness stated that prosecutor (who was a temporary ■ employee) had been m Department for eighteen months. He, .understood that- ( ho had -lieen employed in other Departments off and on for somo lyears. ■ I olloek replied to the'charges. The Minister dccided that no inquiry could ;be held. - It was in tho interest' of the Service that employees should le'ad'moral lives. Upon recoipt .of the- first letter,- witness informed prisoner that unless he made specific charts the. matter could not be inquired l into. lle-oxamined, witness stated flint;- prior to the date in'question, prosecutor had, as'tolas, he knew, led a moral life". Mr. Wilford announced that that'-was his case.

Mr. Gray contended that Mr. Wilford should at that stage call his client. His Honour said that -Mr. Wilford was following the course adopted by Sir Charles Kussell. recently at Home, and was in order Mr. Wilford remarked that he intended to take his case in his own way, and that the question as to whether or not 'he should call 1 other evidence depended on whether or not ' Mr. ; Gray produced -any evidence : that required answering.' :

Mr. Gray then submitted that there was no case to go to tho jury. There was no order of a Magistrate oi; of a Judge of tho Supremo Court as required by tho Act. Mr. Wilford: Tho necessary order has been obtained. '

His Honour: There ia no proof before the Court that tho order has been made. Mr./ Gray, continuing,, submitted also that thor'e. was no evidence_to-connect the prisoner with the writing .in.,tlie.letter, and further, that if there was~any that he was. the writer, the lottol- was written on a privileged occasion. The writer, whoever he

was, had an interest as -a momber of ..the public in bringing under the notice of tlio head of a Government Departmont tho conduct of in- employee. Mr. Wilford submitted that tho Court must rulo that the privilege was absolute. Ho quoted'Odger, p. 635. His Honour: I shall not withdraw tho case from the jury 011 tho third ground. Privilcgo depends 011 proof. I would like to hear counsel with reference to tho other points. Mr. Wilford submitted that it was not necessary to produce tho order. His ifonour: I shall resorvo for the opinion of the Court of Appeal , the quostion as to whether the failure of tho prosecution to produce the order or evidence that it has been obtained is fatal to tho prosecution. Mr. Wilford contended that thero was evidence connecting prisoner with the writing of tho letter. His Honour accepted counsel's contention. Mr. Gray thou outlined the case for tho 'defence. He mentioned, inter alia, that lieeson boarded at a houso kept by Mrs. Pollock's mother. Mrs. Pollock died thero in Fobruary last, after months of intonso suffering. When prisoner heard about Pollock's misdeeds ho became very indignant. Before writing to Mr. Iloyes prisoner asked tlio polico to tako up tho matter; but ho was informed that only tlio family could take action. He did not writo'to Mr. Heyes at tho suggestion of the family. Tho prisoner might havo acted impulsively, but he was sincere, and felt that his action was in the interests of tho public. Ono morning, whilst preaching 011 Foreign Missions, tho matters which wcro tho subject of the charges so impressed liini that 110 roferred'to them. Ho (counsel) would call tho lato Mrs. Pollock's mother, her daughter, and "other witnesses. The late Mrs; Pollock's mother gave evidence that Pollock and her daughter were marriod in 1898. Witness and .her .husband did not appro.ve of tho marriage. Some time previously, she had asked Pollock if ho cared for her daughter, and Pollock had. replied that he cared'for lior as much as for other .girls.. Some years later, , witness learned that Pollock had before tho marriage committed an offence on her daughter. In 1904 he attempted to commit an offence on a younger daughter. He had admitted to her that ho'had had to pay a large sum to settle an affiliation case. Beeson came to board at her. residence in January last. Mrs. Pollock died at her place in February last, after months of intense suffering. Sho told Beeson about Pollock's misdeeds, but did not request, him to mako tho charges. Air. Wilford at this tendered, i number of letters, included among which wcro tho following " April 30, 1907. To W. J. Pollock.—The 'vehemence of my cry'is about as inexplicable, I .presume, as your contcmptiblo, underhanded campaign of slander and contumely behind my back while professing friendship to my face, and the more inexcusable inasmuch as it was inaugurated long before I showed my unfriendliness towards you, and theroforo without provocation and without cause. ; And, for it in my own good time you shall be severely punished. None understands the science—tho strategy and tactics— of revenge better than I do, and along this line you will bo completely out-manoeuvred at overy turn. Had you shown the least tact or foresight, you would not havo played so completely into my hands as you have done. Knowing tho truth, would surely sooner or later come out, not only in connection with .the recently-deceased,- but in another most serious criminal' attempt, which, if I choose, will effectually close your carcer ; you need be very wise and very circumspect in your treatment of-me henceforth; and I have guarded against overy contingency, of foul play in a manner you little dream' of. I have, never answered you personally in tho matter of your, gratuitous abuse and. ridicule, but suffice it to say your life has been a carnival of lust, of cowardly, inhuman, brutal passion, sparing neither women nor children; your life is - a gigantic moral negation, and a gigantic-intellectual negation. ,1 .have lieyer known its equal—and that is saying a great deal., Re the 35., upon my presenting your note to Mrs.: -tt-tj she; immediately assumed full responsibility, -and .will, -having -'incurred the debt, see tohitsnrieimbursementijr.y.bu are. therefore- absolvtdj ■; I?Will; in: rcohclusioil; tender you a little advice which you will do well to heed. You-have a criminal-record (and of the blackest kind), and by tlio sheerest good luck have escaped the law. Set about the reconstruction of your life, -if possible, on a moral basis; begin in earnest tho work of reformation, the urgency is great, the task superhuman; you will not,, and cannot, do it in your own strength. If in time evidence is offered me that you have set about this purpose with a seriousness and determination that will win its end, then you need fear nothing .from me; but,, if not, then Iknow, what my duty is as a man, a, .citizen, and a Christian; and it is to stop the depredations among. the helpless and innocent of society of what I will call not a hell-hound but a' legion.. I understand you ally, metaphysically, _ and over the diningroom table,'in the midst of apparently inane inconsequential conversation,, sifted you through and through. ,I know your limitations, and thoy are many and great. You arc ail- entire stranger to ;sophistry and to .the finer, intellectual subtleties .which give man his pre-eminence over the brute. . Passion un-tamed,-mad, cruel, has dominated your life. This note may or may not<bo a bitter pill. If you choose to treat it confidentially you may, if not I am prepared for all. eventualities. ,I do not wish to add to Mrs. —- 1111happiness, nor must you, and your .wisdom lies in the suro and systematic liquidation of your account with her, and in a sagacious recognition- of tho sound adage, 1 Lot the dead bury their-dead ' by no further allusions to the past. . Pardon my prolixity. "A. BEESON. '

" Marclr 11, 1907. Dear . Mr. Russell.— Your noto to hand this a.m. If the circumstances were as I suspect you would then have a perfect'right to consider Mrs. —'s message through' me 'rank, impertinence. , 1 should think ■ the same fln your placo. I. have asked Mrs. to write you an ox planation, .'which she can do to your satisfaction.' . . . Now, bear ir mind that yon began to ridicule and-antag-onise mo long before any open unfriendlinesi' sprang up - between ' us. I , gave you nc olfonce; you said things again and again and again behind my bans without cause, without provocation. Kindly remember these points, and that the blame is entirely yours. Yon allude to Pollock having said things about mo.. I am very reluctant to refer to Pollock '.until my time comes. 1 should, repudiate Pollock s good opinion if it were offered me; I don't want his friendship; it would, destroy my reputation, my character —I want his hatred, and the hatred of all such. You say there are ' two sides to tho . question"; don't tell that to anyone from America. Above all, don't toll it to anyone from America who has lived in what ivo call negro States. There is nqt, and cannot be, but the -one side. I will not rof%r to this again until my time comes. Pollock imitated my walk. Ho mimicked my conversation. He ridiculctl and abused me behind my back and jrofessed friendship to my face. He circulated lies about my business, invariably doubted the truth of what I said, was going to 'investigate my record' (what childish rot I investigate my record 1000 miles'from'New York I) I was a nambypamby,. a hypocrite, etc.; hut ho lets mo foot' his bills. 1 quietly analysed Pollock again and again, through and through, over tho dining-room table. ■ I nm quietly amused when I think of his indignation over Chinese outrages and sundry other things. He lacks a knowledge New Zealand cannot give— a knowledge of'men, a knowledge of human nature. It was very bad strategy to opposo me and incur my hate when a little common sonse and foresight would have warned him that tho truth was sure to leak out sooner or later. I have said before, I may not know much of the ethics of rovongc, whether it is right or wrong, but I know the science and tactics. It is not my nature to allow a man's incessant abuse and insult to pass without returning it soonnr or later, with compound interest. Now Zealand is a small country; I am this .day doing business correspondence with 54 newspapers. To ruin a man in New Zealand is ridiculously easy. Pollock must not forget his repeated vili'fi. cations of the Now Zealand Government to mo. I do not forgot his petty, underhanded campaign of clap-trap, suspicion, slandor, and abuse behind my back, oven to bis dying wifo. Mrs. 's persecution is very, very sad. Had I first offended Pollock f could say nothing. Ho started the thing without justification, and, unfortunately for him, to use your own words, ho 'struck a snag.' . . . ." Cross-examined, the witness stated that

thero was 110 understanding between Beeson and 0110 :of lier daughters. When Beeson niaclo tho stutomonts from tho pulpit, tho daughter referred to was present in church. Sho (witness) did not know that Beeson intended to refer to tho matter., A daughter of tho previous witness also gavo ovidcnce. Walter Cresswoll, barrister and solicitor, Christchurch, deposed that, some years ago, Pollock was adjudged the putative father of a child. By consent, the sum of £85 was fixed in.commutation of weekly payments. Cross-examined, witness stated that tho complaint was not laid by the child's.mother, who had blamed some 0110 else. Prisoner gave ovidciice that ho was an Englishman, but had resided in America for sonio time. Ho arrived in Now Zealand on Novomber 6, 1906. Witness considered Pollock an 'enemy of society—a public danger. He told several citizens of stat-emonts alleged to have been made to him by Pollock. Most of them took no notice. Mr. J. G. W. Aitken accompanied him when lie reported the. matter to tho police. Nothing eventuated. Ho conceived it to bo ■ his' duty to make tho charges. After he mado the'remarks from the piilpit, he was publicly chal r lenged by Professor Kirk, tho Civil Servico Association,''.and others. .Cross-examined, prisoner stated that 110 was never known under tho name "Charles Parker." He was not an expert in revenge. Ho had called Pollock " a legion." Ho denied having said to a man named Russell' on the Manawatu station: "Bo warned, Russell. I will got you hounded out of tho Servic'o when I am finished with Pollock.' 1 Tho newspaper report of his statements from tlio pulpit was substantially correct. lie was a Britisher, not a naturalised American, al-. though he had spent a good deai of time in New York during tho past thirteen years. Witness was a smglo man. - Ho had said that Pollock had filled four graves at Karori. Witness was of opinion' that in making tho charges he had acted in the public interest. • This closed the case for tho'defence. - : -His Honour intimated that' the bearing' would bo resumed at 10 o'clock this morning.