THE MACDONALD CASE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1135, 24 May 1911, Page 6

THE MACDONALD CASE.

MORE PLAIN TALK.

SOME PRESS OPINIONS.

That tho public outside- Wellington hal been deeply imprcs.-cd by the result ol the Macdonald case is evident lrom tin amount of notice that the newspapers are giving ") the nll'air. Wo print soma further opinions. ~ Tho "Duniiuvirko Evening News saysi —"The spectacle of a broken man can always 1m depended upon to command a certain degree of public sympathy, anil tho unfortunate cas> of the lion. T. Iv. Macdonald 'in Wellington is not without its pathetic side. When n man places himself within tho reach of (he law, however, punishment is not supposed to be averted by position or sympathy. If a man escapes tne penally iliat would bo meted out to another person guilty of similar wrongdoing, he no longer becomes an object for public sympathy, Ho .is rather a person to be congratulated, because the law does not ajl'cct him. Ufl is above ity'

The "News" proceeds to outline tlie facts of I lie case, and adds: "But why should Macdonald hivo been allowed the opportunity to cover up hie wrong-doing and hoodwink the public . . . Wo are convinced that this is a privilege that would ho accorded to few ether defaulting; trustees. The Dominion' has won general approval in this uniortunato affair, for the fearless manner in which it has carried out an unpleasant duty, and brought the. whole history of (ho caso into the daylight. The fact, ol Macdonald having escaped the penalty ol his wrong-doing will awaken public opinion to a very unsatisfactory position in connection with the administration of justice. Macdonald has been allowed to go scot free because, accordin;: to medical evidence, tho mental worry of a term of imprisonment might have eenous consequences. . . . This opens up tho question of on. 1 , law for (he healthy and another for the unhealthy as far as trustees are concerned. It docs not apply to however delicato who may be placed in a criminal dock on a charge of misappropriating a few pounds. They may certainly be released on medical evidence demonstrating that death will result from n continuance of prison life, but (hey must go (o gaol first. The Mncdonald case has an interest to the public apart from its legal aspect. He, in company with anolirjr gentleman prominently associated with rocent litigation, is a Government nominee of the Legislative Council. It is a duty (hat the Govern, ment owes to the public lo see that these two seats arc rendered vacant before Parliament again meets."

Tito "Pahiatua Herald" discusses at some, length tho validity of Hie pica tbat imprisonment "might" have prejudiced Macdonald's case, and says, inter alia:— "It. is clear that there was no evidence before the CcAirt that the actual conditions of imprisonment (loss of liberty, possible change of diet, etc.) would 1m injurious to defendant. All that tho Court had before it was that (we again quote- the Chief Justice) the doctors thought that if any mental worry and excitement were undergone by the defendant in place of complete rest and quiet he might have an apoplectic seizure-. This brings us to our second point. The medical nieu refrained from expressing an opinion as to whether imprisonment would'increase the mental worry and distress of defendant', and it seems to us unlikely that they would. YVo imagine that when a man who has occupied an important place in the business and political life of his country makes himself liable to imprisonment, ho will have already suffered all the mental distress of which, ho is capable, and that tho actual imprisonment will not increase his mental anguish, which will already havo reached a'crisis. In other words, our contention, is that it is not tho actual imprisonment that produces menial distress, but tho shamo of being liable to imprisonment, and tho-disgrace accompanying it. In point of fact it would bo quite reasonable tbjargtlo that defendant would probably suffer less mental distress in gaol, whero ho .would be comparatively freo from molestation, than ho would out cf gaol, where the meeting with old friends Would almost constantly remind him of his'unfortunate position. . . . Public in-terests-and publio morality would bo better served, wn imagine, if in such a case a writ were allowed to take its course, and the defendant remained in gaol so long ns his health showed no turn for tho.worse."

The "Wairarapa Standard" says:—' "The whole features of the case, were, to put it mildly, very peculiar from first to last. The artier appliad for by Ilia beneficiaries against Macdonald was held in camera, and the various liearinßS and final decision occupied four years. Tho press were ordered not to publish any part of tho proceedings which led ,up to the order being made, and generally a wondronsly sedulous caro was exercised in keeping t;ho case as secret as possible. Tho impression made on the public mind by the extraordinary solicitude on behalf of a defaulting trustee was anything but favourable, and that unfavourable impression is non- intensified a thousandfold by tho offender being allowed to go at large simply because the usual punishment meted out to defaulters of this class, viz., imprisonment, might imperil his life. . . . Tho _ valetudinarian trustee of tho future, if he so wills, shall bo able to play ducks and drakes with tho funds entrusted to his caro iiducially, and he will be nblo to snap his fingers at the law—that is. provided he can put up as long continued a fight as Macdonald did, and be favoured with the amazing patience and solicitude which were shown to that person by bench and bar. . . , Tho matter should not be allowed to drop. The case has now passed out of private hands into those of the Justice Department, and the public will look to that Department to do its duly."

"STRONGLY AGAINST SECRECY."

ME. BERRIES ANSWERS A QUESTION.

(By Tdczranh.-SDecia! Corrcssondont.)

Palmcrston North, May 23, When tho chairman at tho meeting addressed by Mr. Ilerries M.P., last evening announced that the speaker was prepared to answer questions, a man at tho back of tho hall rose and. said: "We wont to hear something about t.ho 'Secret Case.'" (Applause.) Mr. Ilerries replied: "I think you can find out all you want to know about that from the newspapers. As for myself, T don't believe In any secrecy in such cases. Everything should te done openly in tho Courts as much as possible. I mn strongly against secrccv." (Applause.)