CHARGE OF CRIMINAL LIBEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVI, Issue 9450, 22 August 1889, Page 5

CHARGE OF CRIMINAL LIBEL.

[BT TELEGRAPH. —PRBSS ASSOCIATION.] Nelson, Wednesday. A remarkable case of criminal libel occupied the Supreme Court all the afternoon and into the evening. Thos. IT. Mabin, average stater, of Auckland, was charged by James Sclanders, merchant, Nelson, with libels contained in circulars, leaflets, etc. The accused conducted his own awe. The matter originated in consequence of a letter from Shaw, Savill and Co., London, which the accused said the complainant had forged. The authority of the letter was proved by Mr. C. H. Cock, of Wellington. The accused admitted publishing the libels, but insisted on their truth. His Honor then said that no plea of justification having been tiled, a verdict of guilty must be returned, unless the prosecution allowed accused to bring forward his evidence. This was assented to by the prosecution, and the case was gone full}- into. The Judge, in summing up, said the case was a most remarkable one. Mabin had brooded for years, and no doubt to a certain extent it had affected his mind, on this particular subject. The jury at once returned ft verdict of guilty. Mr. Fell, for the prosecution, said the proceedings were not vindictive, but simply to stop persistent libels continued for over seven years. His Honor, addressing Mabin, said he did not propose to pass sentence at present. He spoke of the accused's ability as an average suiter, and said this might have been underrated in Shaw, Savill's letter, but even if that was the case, it was no justification for persevering in so foul an imputation on a gentleman of unblemished character. It was absolutely necessary to stop this course of libels, but he proposed to do no more than require the accused to come up for sentence when called on ; but if his past conduct was in any degree continued, the accused must expect no light punishment. The accused then entered into his own recognisances in £200 to come up for sentence when called on, and said his past actions should not be repeated. .Mr. Fell intimated that if this was so, Mr. Sclanders would not go further in his action for damages.