CASE FOR DEFENCE

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 51, 1 March 1934, Page 11

CASE FOR DEFENCE

NELSON TRIAL IN SAMOA

ANSWER TO CHARGES

APIA, February 27. Besuming for the defence, Mr. Pleasants traversed documentary evidence alleging a criminal offence. He was therefore entitled to demand the fullest proof from the Crown. '. He referred particularly to letters written by Nelson overseas and to documents the authorship of which was not'definitely proven, also to matters published in the "Samoa Guardian." He argued that the mere possession of this matter was insufficient to prove defendant's connection, with.;'the Mau as an active participant, although sympathy with it was admitted. : The Judge held that such" matter must be considered in the light of other evidence- of aiding and abetting the Mau. An objection to the admissibility of copies of the "Guardian" was over-ruled-when it was pointed out that the issues were put in during the crossexamination of Inspector Braisby, some being found at Tuaefu and others being produced to support evidence that the "Guardian" articles were untrue and deceptive. ' Mr. McCarthy answered that the "Samoa Guardian" was founded at Nelson's wishes. Counsel argued that the powers conferred by the Governor-General in Council provided for regulations thought necessary for "the good government of the territory. The war regulations in New Zealand provided for prosecution for sedition other than under the Crimes Act. He submitted that New. Zealand had full authority to make laws and regulations for Samoa, and instanced the Court'of Appeal case, Police v. Nelson, where the Court reduced the fine but upheld the conviction, which was under the same regulations as the present charges. ; The theoretical possibility of existing Orders in Council . being irregular where more than a maximum fine of £5 is imposed is evoking considerable speculation as the result of' Mr. Pleasants' argument. , Addressing the Court, Nelson stated that this was the first occasion he had ever been.able to appear in Court to answer the many charges made against him. Even a hearing in the Privy Council had been denied him. He referred to his five years' exile and the allegations of Sir George Richardson prior to his deportation, also the action taken in the present prosecution. He pleaded for permission to present his address in his own way. ■ The Judge granted the request, and the Court adjourned to hear the atldress on March 1.