COUNSEL SQUASHED

NZ Truth, Issue 1062, 1 April 1926, Page 9

COUNSEL SQUASHED

Suppression Refused NEWSPAPERS BLAMED (From "Truth's" Special Auckland Rep.) Yhfire was rather a spirited controvorsy at the Auckland Magistrate's Court the other morning when Mr. Dickson asked for the suppression of the names of two men who had been found guilty of stealing four square riggers of beer. Little < did William Lawrie and .Richard Fyfe think when they were m the Waverley Hotel one Saturday night recently and made off with four bottles of b<*>r — only two had been ordered— that their action would cause a wordy clash between Bench and Bar. Afinr S.M. Hunt had imposed a fine of 40/- on each of the two accused, counsel asked if their names could be suppressed. The Magistrate, who ia a firm believer that publicity is the greatest deterrent to crime and presumably that suppression is the opposite, at once made it quite clear that he would not make such an order. He also indicated that it was a waste of time to make the request. Counsel, however,, would not take that ansWer and said he insisted that he be heard on the question of 'suppression. So a little while later Mr. Dickson mentioned the matter again arid W^-s allowed his say. He attaoked the Press for the stand they had taken on the question and said that their attitude should have >no influence on the Courts. This Press, he contended, was unreasonable and unfair and had dictated to the Courts what their discretion should be m the matter of suppression. It was his contention that the Press did hot know the circumstances lit many of the cases and he agreed witn Magistrates m most instances where suppression had been ordered. The S.M.: I refuse to male? the order m this case. When I think the circurristanceu warrant suppression I will order it. Mr. Dickson: The whole trend, sir/ is towards suppression. Counsel quoted the steps being taken m England m regard to the suppression of details of divorce cases. Mr. Hunt: I agree with that. There is, however, no punishment . if the names of offenders are suppressed. I will not be foolish enough to make any rule on the point. Counsel argued that the punishment by publication m that case was out of all proportion to the nature of the crime. Tho Bench could not see it his way; Magistrate Hunt said that if he agreed to suppression it would mean that there would be no punishment at all for men who chose to kick over the traces. - Publication was the only punishment som« men would ever receive and it would make people think what they were doing with their names Avhen they went jnto hotels and got drinking.