SLANDER.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5728, 25 October 1905, Page 3

SLANDER.

CRIAIINAL CODE AAIENDAIENT. BEFORE THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

In tho Legislative Council yesterday, tho Hon Air Pitt moved tho second reading of the Criminal Code Act Amendment Bill, which was tho cause of the recent stonewall in tho Lower House.

In explaining the provisions of the measure, lie said there were certain safeguards which would make it perfectly safe for the Council to 'pass the bill. It might bo asked why it was desired to alter the law in New Zealand, and make it different to that'existing in'England. Weil, attempts had been made to bring the English law to the same position as tho present bill sought to do, but the attempts had failed. Tho English libel 'law, however, was different from ours, and ho hoped the day was not far distant when our law of libel would bo tho same as in England. Under the bill before tho Council a man need have no fear it he spoke tho truth of another, hut if he uttered slander, then he should suffer as would one who wrote a libel. There was no fear under tho bill of an innocent man being punished, but it was a scandalous shame that anyone should escape punishment because ho gave publicity to a slander with the tongue rather than with the pen. Tho_ Hon Air' Bigg considered that the bill should not be allowed to pass. In ids opinion, a general law was being made to fit special cases. That was always a mistake. In this case the bill went in the direction of stilling public criticism. The persons who would suffer under the hill would not be those whom ono would like to see punished, but the young and inexperienced. Tho bill had not been asked for, and the Government was making a mistake in passing such a bill to meet tho special case of some persons who had for the past few months been criticising our public men.

Tho Hon Mr Wigram agreed with a contention that had been put forward that a public man should take fair, and oven harsh criticism, but lie was entirely opposed to the contention that a public man should put up with foul slander. If wo accepted that doctrine it would moan that many highly intelligent and highly-strung citizens would not accept public office. At the samo time he objected to such an important hill being brought down at the end of session, and being forced through. The Hon Mr Jones believed tho bill had been drawn up to' meet a special case, but ho believed that that special case haa been tho cause of drawing attention to tho need of such legislation. Tho 1 no.must bo drawn somewßorc, and where certain individuals wore becoming frenzied and inflamed with political hatred, it was time to call a halt. Ho sympathised entirely with a measure that was to deal with, and put a stop to. license run mad. Replying, the Hon Air Pitt said the sufferers by the bill would be tho men of straw who were put up by evillydisposed persons to slander their followmen. The second reading was carried by 20 votes to 4.