FULL COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 14 July 1930, Page 5

FULL COURT

appeal BY SLIPPER OE SAMOA

(By Telegraph—Per Press Association.!

WELLINGTON, July 14. The Full Court, consisting of the Chief Justice (Sir M. M yersj, Justices Herd man, Adams and Reid, is to-day hearing the appeal of Thomas Benjamin Slipper, of Apia, Samoa., a barrister and solicitor, front a conviction recorded against him in Samoa this year.

Information was laid against Slip-

per on February 14th. by Braisley, a

police official, that on February 12th. he did publish a defamatory libel against the Administrator of Samoa, in a letter which he wrote to the Administrator, and that in the letter were words abusing and insulting to a member of the Legislative Council of Samoa.

The case came on for hearing before Chief Justice Luxford on 26th. February at Apia. The prosecution contended that the meaning of the letter was that thej Administrator refused to protect the women and children of Samoa against the terrorisation by an armed Government force, and against death by unjustifiable rifle fire; and that the Administrator intended to inflict bloodshed upon Samoans, in order to secure for himself the absolute rule of the country.

Tire defence was that the letter was not defamatory within the meaning of the Sampan Act; that the statements in the letter were true in fact and were for the public 'benefit, and that the letter was privileged as written b'y a .solicitor for a client, The Judge held that the letter did, in fact, Impute the meaning alleged by the prosecution; that statements in the letter were untrue, and that the letter was mot privileged as a letter written by a! solicitor for a. client. 1 , Slipper was sentenced to three, months’ imprisonment and fined £lO5. Subsequent to this conviction, Slipper’s practicing certificate was cancelled by the Administrator. Slipper is now appealing against this conviction and is represented by H. N. Von Haast and S. Fitzherhert. Counsel for the Crown is the Solici-tor-General, Mr A. Fair, K.C. Air Von Haast for Appellant said the appeal was brought under Section 83 of Samoa . Act, 1921. Slipper had been found guilty oil both charges and sentenced to three months imprisonment' and fined £lO5 on one charge and sentenced to three months imprisonment on the other, the sentences to be concurrent. Both charges were based on one set of facts, tffie writing of the letter, and therefore Slipper was convicted twice for the same act. That was contrary to the principles of law and one conviction at least must be squashed. In Samoa, a man charged with defamatory libel had no protection such as was given in New Zealand under the Crimes Act.

The words in the letter' complained of, and views expressed: therein, were the words and views of Slipper’s clients, and the communication of them to the Administrator was privileged, as communications made by a solicitor on behalf of a client. A solicitor was bound to do his best for his client, and in any criminal charge ngainst the solicitor, the malice of a client could mot be implied to him. It was true that- Slipper had said in his letter: “Tt is regrettable that death and bloodshed appear to be of small consequence to your Excellency, compared with the desire, evident and expressed, of absolutism,” but this; was not a personal attack on the administrator, but criticism of the poiliey adopted by the Administrator and by the Samoan Government,

The Chief Justice remarked that it was highly regrettable that any solicitor should write such a letter whether it involved the commission of an offence or riot. “A solicitor,” his Honor continued, “should have more respect for himself, his profession and for hi,s duty as a solicitor, than, to write such a letter.”

Von Hast agreed that the wording of the letter was injudicious and crude, but pointed out that Slipper had represented the. natives in all matters that arose out of the troubled events of December, 1929. and he suggested that Slipper’s judgment had been affected by the stress of the times.