AFTER SUPPER

Evening Post, Volume XCIV, Issue 74, 25 September 1917, Page 8

AFTER SUPPER

WORDS OF INDISCRETION

APPEAL AGAINST A CONVICTION

A case of considerable interest, although the opening stages were in the far off district of the Bay of. Plenty, was carried further this morning before the Full Court. The case was that of the appeal of Jolm Fisher Skipper against a conviction and sentence of three months' imprisonment imposed upon him for having made use of words calculated to interfere "with recruiting. On the bench were their Honours the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr. Justice Denniston, Mr. Justice Cooper, Mr. Justice Chapman, and Mr. Justice Hosking. Mr. J. R. Reed, K.C., of Auckland,' with him Mr. H. Van Staveren, appeared on behalf of the appellant, and the j nominal respondent—Denis Joseph. Cummings, the police sergeant who laid the information—was represented by the Solicitor-General, Mr. J. W. Salmond, K.C. Mr. Reed, in outlining the case for the appellant, said that the appeal was one from a decision of the Magistrate at Rotorua. It had originally been an appeal to the Supreme Court at Hamilton, but certain matters of law were involved, and the learned Judge there had considered the case to be of sufficient importance to refer it to a Bench of Judges in Wellington. The charge, counsel went on to say, was laid under paragraph 4 of section 1 of the War Regulations gazetted on 19th July, 1915, which provided that no person shall publish, or cause to be published, any statement or matter likely to interfere with recruiting. The evidence in the Lower Court, counsel continued, showed that at a social gathering held at Matata, Bay of Plenty, Skipper had made use of certain words held to be detrimental to recruiting. TWO INFLUENCES. Uncontrodicted evidence had been given that Skipper was an absolutely loyal and patriotic man, and, indeed, he should be so if heredity would tend to make him so. His mother was a sister of Lord John 'Fisher, First Lord of the Admiralty, and he was a direct descendant of Lord Nelson. The Chief Justice : Heredity counts for little when a man fills himself up. with liquor. Mr. Justice Cooper: When the wine ia in, the wit is out. Proceeding, Mr. Reed said that evidence, also uncontradicted, had beer given to show that Skipper had taken a very active part in patriotic work in the Bay o£ Plenty, and had himself subscribed more'than. £500 to Red Cross and other funds. The Bay of Plenty was one of the best recruiting districts in the Dominion, and it had only taken one ballot to exhaust the First Division there. Skipper was 53 years of age and had -volunteered for active service three times, but was of course rejected. He had no son of military age, but his five daughters had volunteered for service as nurses. LIQUOR AND LANGUAGE. At the time when the words complained of were' used, Skipper was under the influence of liquor, and he was also fiMl of irritation and anger against the military authorities for the manner in which —as he thought—some returned soldiers (including his own son-in-law) had been treated. He had gone to Auckland to meet the men, and he had considered they were neglected by the authorities. So much so that he went and got a quantity of cigarettes for them, and even gave some of them money. Then, at a welcome "social" at Matata, he got up after supper (at 11.30 p.m.), and, although he began to speak quite moderately, he gradually worked himself up, and at the close of his speech he made use of language which was, no doubt, objectionable. <l Mr. Justice Denniston : Sultry ! Mr./ Justice Cooper: Well, painfully free. ', Mr. Justice Denniston : He might have been taken up on a charge of using indecent language. . Mr. Reed : The only person of military age present was a Maori who. enlisted that night. THE MORNING AFTER.. Mr. Reed went on to say that the next morning Skipper addressed a Maori gathering, exhorting them to do their share for Empire. As an inducement to them to do so he offered, if any of them had unpaid accounts at his store, to wipa off the amounts. This he eventually did to the extent of about £200, and two consignments of Maoris shortly afterwards left for camp. Mr. Justice Hosking said that the evidence, as outlined by Mr. Reed, might show an absence of mens rea, if that would be any use, but would, that justify the use of the words, At this stage some argume&fc arose as to whether a man should, or should not, be kept in prison pending an appeal. The Solicitor-General pointed out 'that, under the Military Service Act;, a convicted man could not be liberated until his appeal had been heard. Mr. Justice Denniston : But surely a man should not be submitted to the indignity of hard labour while his appeal is pending.

Mr. Reed said that three questions would be sTibmitted : (1) Did the Military Service Act destroy the efficacy of the branch, of the regulations under whioh the appellant had been convicted? (2) If it did not destroy the efficacy of that branch, were the statements made such as would be likely to interfere with recruiting? (3) Whether the Supreme Court, on a general appeal, if it. dismisses the appeal, has power, to revise the sentence passed by the Magistrate ? Counsel went on to quote authorities at length to support his contention that the Court has power to revise, affirm, or amend a sentence. Counsel submitted that under the Justice oE the Peace Act the Supreme Court had power to vary the conviction by reducing the sentence imposed by an inferior Court. The Chief Justice: Then would it have power to increase the sentence? Mr. Reed : Probably, your honour. | The Chief Justice: But must it not follow that it has that power? (Proceeding.)