CONTEMPT ALLEGED

Grey River Argus, 1 May 1942, Page 6

CONTEMPT ALLEGED

Papers Prosecuted STATEMENTS ATTRIBUTED TO MR. J. ROBERTS. WELLINGTON, April 30. SRatementSj published Ln “The Standard.” and “The Evening Post," of remarks purported to have been made by James Roberts, at the recent Labour Conference, formed the basis of actions in the Full Court, today, on behalf of the Crown, against the printers and publishers, for alleged contempt of Court. There was one charge against both papers of publishing a statement contemptuous of the Supreme Court, and “The Standard” was also charged .with publishing a statement contemptuous of the Court of Arbitration.

Regret at the publications and assurances of confidence in the integrity of courts were expressed by counsel' for the defendants. Decision was reserved.

P.A. WELLINGTON, April 30. The Solicitor General (Mr. Cornish), said that inquiries had resulted in Mr. Roberts denying that he made either of the statements concerned in the charges. Inquiries had also shown that breaches of the law made by the “Post” and “Standard” were not wilful breaches. He understood that each newspaper was working under pressure at the time. Counsel for the “Post,” said that the report in that newspaper was not compiled from notes of its own reporters, who were not permitted inside the Labour Conference Building. The report was simply extracted from the “Standard,” and acknowledged ito the “Standard.” Counsel for the “Standard,” replying to the Bench, said it was believe 1 ed at the time of publication that ihe statements were a true and accurate report. They had been reported by an experienced man. The Chief Justice: The reporter maintains now that the words were said? Counsel: Yes.

The Chief Justice: It is a pity we have not something in the way of evidence from Mr. Roberts and the reporter. The Chief Justice saici that contempt of Court was admitted, but the Court considered it better to put its views and reasons in writing. That would be done as soon as possible. The statement in respect of which both papers were charged, appeared first in the “Standard” of April 9th. and was reprinted by the “Post.” It v-as as follows: “He had never known the Supreme Court to give a decision in favour of the workers where it could possibly avoid it. The other statement was: “While' he. agreed that they could not get fair play from the Court of Arbitration, he was of the opinion that, unless they altered the basis and grouping of workers, they had to have --a Court to do the job. On the Bench were the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Blair and Mr. Justice Smith.