PRESS OPINIONS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1134, 23 May 1911, Page 6

PRESS OPINIONS.

Many of our contemporaries have commented editorially upon the caso of Eose v. Macdonald. The Christchurcli ."Press"" thinks it difficult , to .see-how, in view of the evidence.'of "tho''. doctors, : the .Court could have done otherwise than discharge Macdonald, and adds:— "We shall express no opinion on the 'manner in whicn tho defendant discharged ills duty as a trustee, in view of tne fact that the Judges liavo, stated that tho plaintiffs may still liavcj recourse to criminal or bankruptcy With regard to tho defendants complaint as to the publicity recently given to the case having ruined his business and prevented him from raising tlic .MUIIO lie was ordered to pay to rho beneficiaries of tho estate, we do not think ho is entitled to much sympathy. For nearly four years proceedings were conducted 111 camera while he was disputing his liability. As soon as, that liaoility was fixed and he was ordered to pay, it was certainly in tho public interest that the fact should be made known. If it is argued that publicity ruined his credit and prevented his borrowing the money, the obvious reply is that if ho had succeeded in borrowing the. money without* the liability being. disclosed,, a moral, if not-a'legal, fraild' lyould'have been perpetrated 011 the person by whom the money was advanced,"

The "Wairarapa Daily Times" thinks the decision will be "regarded with very mixed feelings" by the public. The hearing of tho case in camera, during most of its stages was, this paper says presumably because he [MacdonaldJ was a well-known .and prominent public man. "And now," it adds, "when called upon to pay the penalty for his misdeeds, ho has succeeded in escaping that punishment by evoking mysterious processes ot the law—processes which might have been overlooked if the defendant had been a man of less consequence. . . . No one wishes to see the Hon. T. lv. Macdonald unduly persecuted; but that he has succeeded in escaping the consequences ot his misdeeds by proving ill-health will surely give rise to the suggestion that had the person concerned been of less social and political importance,' lie would have been, ere this, existing under less comfortable conditions." In a further reference to the case yesterday, the "Daily Times," replying to a correspondent who had complained, that its first comment was unnecessarily severe and hatl "impugned the integrity ot his Majesty's Judges,"' remarked:— "Even had we wished, wo dared not havo gone -that length, because a newspaper, like an individual, may make itself liable to punishment for contempt of Court. AVhat we did say was that tile decision of the Court would not bo received by the people of this country with any marked approval, and was, owing to the special circumstances of tho case, singularly unfortunate. Although criminal proceedings have not yet been instituted against tho Hon. Mr Macdonald, tho Court of Appeal has practically found him. guilty of the misappropriation of trust money; and everyone knows that most men in that position aTe liable to heavy punishment. The fact that Macdonald, a prominent business and public man and a member of the Legislature, who succeeded in ..having., .the, earlier stages of the case against'hint kept secret, had now escaped the punishment imposed on him as a result of his failure to account for trust moneys, will bo construed in only ono way. The Judges, withont doubt, were actuated by motives entirely honourable;. yet, in view of the circumstances, their finding is an unfortunate one."

The "Jlanawatu Evening Standard" says

"Roso and others v. Macdonald will go down to history as one of tho most notorious oases ever heard in the Courts of the Dominion. The decision of tho Court on Friday has added still more to tho feeling of uneasiness with .which the whole case has been viewed by the general public, and there can be little doubt that unless decisive steps are taken in tho'near future to give tnc plaintiffs some redress for the wrongs the r \- have suffered tho whole transaction will have a decidedly unhealthy effect on tho confidence placcd in our Courts of Justice by tho people. No matter how tho case may bo considered by tho public the fact cannot

bo hidden, that a prominent politician has escaped. imprisonment for ail offence of the -.very gravest character. Tho case possesses some startling features, and it is incerely to he hoped that tho notoriety t has. attained will mark it in the utijre. against . being, accepted as a )rcccdent. . Perhaps the

ugliest point • about tho whole afiai is tlio i idea , that may be generated ' tha there is one law for the rich'and anothei for tho poor. Had defendant been with out means and quite uiuhfluential wouli he' have still escaped the penalty of tin law as he has done in this instance? i: tho question being asked on all sides. Thi Bench was guided in its decision to di 9 chargo defendant by the fact that foui doctors were unanimous tliafc he was unfit to go to gaol, and the wprry thus pro cluced might cause his death. Counse. for tho plaintiffs, in a remarkably outspoken reply, pointed out that the worrj thus produced could not ,bo greater thai that already encountered," The "Standard" goes 'on to cite tho case of a mac who, convicted in Palmorston of falsi pretences, and discharged because lie wa; suffering from an incurable .complaint, was guilty :of a, frcsh\.offence three months later, and sent to gaol for a long period. "It would thus," fays the "Standard," "appear that sickness is not always held to be a sufficient reason for permitting a man to escapo tho penaUj •for his actions, and the' question naturally arises: What limit should bo placed upon-the precedent now established? AVe have no hesitation in saying that Macdonald's case is much graver than the one we have already mentioned, and there may be two opinions as to which of the two was suffering the more serious complaint. Under the circumstances it would appear that there are two methods of treating this plea of exemption. Tho ca.so is one which ought not to bo shelved, and the public will be anxious to learn whether the Justice Department intends to do its duty."

The "Manawatu Daily Times" says tho ca=e "has produced,a deep public impression." It is non-committal on the points of tho secrecy of the case'and the validity nf the plea of ill-health, but speaks plainly on tho case as a whole: "That is as it stands; but it certainly should not lie allowed to stand there. Tho plaintiffs have established their case of a breach of trust. The vagrant who takes a pair of boots promptly gets six months' imprisonment, ivhether his health is good or not, and is allowed to get on as best he may in the gaol hospital. The public man if he is proved to liavo misappropriated thousands entrusted to him should ho proceeded against criminally or made to face the Bankruptcy Court, where thero is punitive machinery to meet any fraud that may be discovered. It may be that Mr. Macdonald has not technically forfeited his seat in the Upper House yet, though if either of the proceedings mentioned and indicated by Mr. Justice Chapman, succeeded, his seat would bo forfeited, but it certainly should be tho duty of flic Justice Department to go into tlio' matters which have been revealed, and to take such steps as will prevent the defendant, if he was guilty of tho things of which he is accused, continuing to sit amonsst tho legislators of the country. . • • There is no doubt that if tho Government is not able before the session opens to secure Mr. Macdonald's resignation, and if he has not meantime cleared himself, exception should, bo taken to his sitting by his fellow-members of the Couii-