The Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1878.

Oamaru Mail, Volume III, Issue 646, 29 May 1878, Page 2

The Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1878.

Tub Morning Herald, an unfortunate newspaper, started in Dmicilin six months ago for the purpose of compelling the Otago Daily times to withdraw from the fieM of journalism, yesterday abandoned the dull monotonous tone that has invariably characterised its columns to treat its rentiers to a little sensation. That it was necessary that some expedient should be adopted "to induce those who subscribe to that journal to untold it. or release it from its wrappers, no one will for one moment deny who is conversant with its history. But li>* Herald has made another mistake. The secret of journalistic success is the production of a sheet thai will commend itself to the* public both by the ability and truthfulness which are to j bo found iu its columns. If a paper aims ht"h, and aspires to become a power, it should not sell itself to unprincipled men. ] irt order that they may expend their professional jealousy upon any of those against whom they may have a grudge. This is what some papers do. Driven into a comer from want of public stipporc in their advertising columns.. they cannot atl'ord to pay the salary of " an editor, and th.-y arc therefore reduced to the necessity of accepting gratuitous contributions from anybody and everybody who can throw a few words of English together. and who. of course-, in return, have the privilege of airimr their little grievances and of attempting to work their own ends. We do ik>r. say that the Morning Herald has permitted its sheet to be stained by the pens f f sti-r't nun whilst professing to be possessed of a public spirit, although appearances are against it. Wc merely point our that this is one of the d-uurers of a miitiltudtnous editorial statr". who«e payment is their privilege to treat a pap.-r as"they would a tennis ball. Hut that the article in yesterday's Herald bears the impress of professional jealousy cannot he doubted. We will dispose of "that part of the article which throws some doubt on the position which Mr. Jones holds in relation to the Evening Mail in a few words. We presume that whether he is editor, or proprietor, or both, is of small moment in discussing the question at issue, and the doubt bears the appearance of having been draped in iu order to bo equal with Mr. Jones for baring thought proper to employ a northern lawyer to conduct his ease for him. Nor can we quite comprehend why reference should be made to the article and d senssion on its merits revived at this late hour, and in connection with the subject upon which the writer treats, unless it is due to the professional chagrin of some Dunedin lawyer. There J3 little room for doubt that the references to Mr. Joxes and the article ,m Mr. Wnrr.iKEr. and his friends were made in a spirit of bitterness, and with an entire ignorance of the facts of the case. What does the writer in the Morntut; Herald know of land transactions in the North .' And yet he has the impertinence to otter nn opinion upon the merits of the case. The question as to whether 3lr. Joxes was morally right or wrong in having written and published the article hinges entirely upon the truth of the assertions contained therein. 3lr. Wiiit.vkei: was afforded an opportunity of proving his innocence: but he shrunk from the task, notwithstanding that of the several witnesses present at tho trial the majority were personal friends of that gentleman. What deduction was to be drawn from this circumstance < What, indeed, but that which was drawn by the jury—that Mr. Jones was innocent. We deny, f here fore, "that the attack upon Mr. WitiTAKEi: was a very gross one," for, if [ ri:,- charges were true, it behoved any jotirnalLst" who possessed ;; knowledge of ■he facts of the case—and Sir. Joxes acquired his knowledge of the matter during a three years' residence in Waik.uo as proprietor of the Waikato Times—to make them known. If the Herald had said that the transactions that called forth such severe strictures were " very- gross," it would have steered nearer to the truth, and its opinion would have harmonised with that of nearly the whole population of the Colony. The writer in the Herald after blundering, on in a peculiarly hazy manner, says that the "outside portion of the public did not attach the same degree of importance to the newspaper criticisms of an obscure journal ii|Hjn a very old colonist and i traditionary politician " as did the House. J This sentence is only celebrated for its | illogical character. The public is not, j in our opinion, careless of the manner in j which the public estate is administered, j and it matters not whether the man who l seek* wrongfully to enrich himself at the |

public expense be a king or a beggar, he should be taken to task for it, whether the circumstance be made known by that obscure journal the Oamnru Mail, or the Morning Herald. It then insults the jurv and people of Dunedin by asserting that " the House likewise erred in its tar-reaching efforts to discover an impartial tribunal when it selected Dunedin as the place of trial, where necessarily all the land scandals and small-talk of Piako were Greek, or little better, to even such a special jury as was empannelled for the occasion." Had the case been tried in Christchurch, Wellington, or even Auckland, the result would have been the same: indeed, the nearer the approach to swind'edom, the greatur was the anxiety of the people to put an end to the improper S:i!id transactions that were sapping the foundations of their prosperity. The accused expressed his willingness to submit to the ultimatum of any tribunal in the country : and, v.c presume, the Government of which the " wary politician," Mr Win taken, was a member, thought that the accused stood as good a chance of of being convicted in Dunedin as elsewhere. ° The insinuation of the Herald that the Dunedin jury was neither impartial nor capable of understanding the case, is a gross aspersion on tnc character and intelligence of the gentlemen that composed that tribunal. Now we come to the gist of the whole matter. Tlie Herald says :—" It seems that Mr. Jones, a resident of Oamaru, was not content with the common legal fare of the Dnnedin .Supreme Court—with the Mac.vs.skys or Stouts, the Smiths, Cooks, Hot.mf.ses. Baiitons or Dexnistoxs, or G'haf.uaxs or Stewarts who ordinarily practice at the Bar here. Mr. Rf.ks —better known as a voluble and vociferous politician than a lawyer—must needs be brought from Auckland or Hawke's Bay to invent two or three demurrable pleas, merely in order to find some judicial work for Mr. Justice Jouxstox and his ' brother Williams.' Mr. Bees certainly had the pleasure of delivering subsequently Avhat Ave presume some critics term ■' a very able and interesting address' to the twelve good men and true avlio Avere impaled in the jury box. Wo question, however, avliether a few liberal quotations from ' Valpy's Delectus' would not have been equally appreciable." Here is direct evidence of the motive to which the article in our contemporary owes its origin—professional jealousy ; and we cannot help thinking it significant that Mr. Mac.wssey's 11:11110 should have been placed iirsi on the list. Wo think that avc might trace tiie write-.' by giving the matter a little considerati- :i : but let us analyse the foregoing sentence. We suppose that Mr. Jones used his own discretion in selecting legal assistance, and we Avould not Avonder if the idea of the legal faro being commoner in Dunedin than cLsewiicre never crossed his mind. In Dunedin there are, of course, lawyers —good, bad. and indifferent, aud \vc should think that the Avriter of the article in our contemporary belonged t>i the latter clays. But let us sea whose names appear on the bill of fare that our contemporary has supplied to us, j alas, too late, it is to be regretted for the writer's sake, to etu-.bL Mr. Jones to act ii;)im his suggestion.. Thuv are "the "<~>r ''«■■ Cooks, HoLAIKSK.-;. B'-1.T0.V-. !,r j.)SV.\'7STOX.->, ('/' I Chal'Maxs, or Stuwaiit. 1 :." Our readers I will please observe. «.//. ]i'i..r*(itt that there i are almost as many " <<rs" as there are lawyers in this novel sentence-, thrown in I an though distributed from a pepper-box. j Who are ' : the Macasskys (" Wo have heard of one gentleman < if that name who ! had something to do with the Waka j Maori case (which cost the country about I Lb'OOO). after it had been worked up ! bv Messrs. Bem. and Sheeiian, and who, ..hilst conducting the case, made jokes in his usual happy and unaffected manner, and returned to Dunedin after an absence of a iirtl ; oA-er a Avec-k with over 300 bright guineas in his pocket ; Ave have heard of the gentleman that had the colness to appl;. jus: before the article was onbUshed in our contt-mporarv to Mr. J. A. HisT.or f-,r a copy of the" bill of costs in the. Wjjnv.KXß-JoNKS libel case, and who, as he refused to state the purpose for which ho Avanted it, was denied the favor. The Avruer has surely got mixed much after the fashion of a man who has transgressed the laws of sobriety until he sees double. Amongst the other names Ave recognise those of gentlemen who buzzed aiound the late Attorney-General like tiies round a sugar barrel, and one of Avhom Avas designated by Mr. Ref.s " a sucking CroAvn Prosecutor." It is surprising that Avith such an amount of legal : talent, whose acumen and zeal were rendered doubly keen by intense jealousy, Mr. Jones is not now doing a term in ■ Dunedin gaol. Even the accused Avas gratified Avhen some point favorable to the prosecutor arose and lighted up their woe-begone visages ; felt quite uncomi f< triable Avhen one of them—a rising , young barrister—was put through a trying ordeal by Mr. Bees, as Avitness on the other side ; and aims glad to bo spared a repetition of the painful sight by another gentlemen mentioned on the bill of fare begging oil". We are not, of course, going ; to compare the counsel for the accused with Mr. Ma<.wssey ; but, if a legal gentle- ; men receives 300 guineas for expending a i week or so of his time on a case that entails no hard Avork, and requires as much knowledge—the drudgery having been done by others—Messrs. Bees and Hjslop should be pardoned if they think that they are entitled to iho amount set down in the bill of coals for what ' they did in the WnrTAKEP.-JoNES case. Unlike the Waka Maori case, it was necessary that considerable time, trouble, . and knowledge should be bronvV. to bear in its preparation. It was pending for I seven months, and during that period it was, iti ord-jr to suit all parties concerned. adjourned from time to time, Avhich entailed Avork for v.hieh, as " the Macasskys or Stouts, the Smiths, Cooes, Holmksks, Bahtons, or Dennistons, or Chapmans, or Steaa-arts " knoAv, lawyers expect to be paid. The writer in the Herald seems to be ignorant of the magnitude of the case. Weeks were expended in searching records, and consultations Avere frequently held for days at a time, whilst the money expended in telegraphic communications between Mr. Bees, Mr. T. W. Hisloi', Mr. J. A. Hip lop and Mr. Jones, would amount to a sued' fortune. It should be remembered th-ic every I preparation asms made to prow i what had been asserted in the articlej which Avas adjudged to be libellous, and in order to do this, a perfect know- | luelgo of all the land transactions bearing

upon the. matter for more than thirtyyears 'was necessary. Then, again, Mr. Rees was compelled to leave a lucrative practice in Hawkes Bay, where he had a number of important cases in hand ; and we know that Mr. Hisiop's time, for months together, was almost wholly taken up on the case. In addition to this, surely a knowledge of native land transactions, gained at a cost of many years' research, should be paid for. We unhesitatingly assert that there is not a lawyer in Dunedin who would have possessed the necessary information to carry the accused successfully through his trouble, had Mr. Whitaker possessed the courage to allow the matter to be thoroughly investigated; and that he would have done so had almost any other man than Mr. Rees been conducting the case for the accused, we have not the least doubt. The charges may seem high—and lawyers' charges generally do—but we believe that they would have been just as high had ''the Macasseys or Stouts, the Smiths, Cooks, Holmeses, Bartons or Bennistons, or Chapmans, or Stewarts," or almost any other Dun- i edin lawyer been engaged for the defence. However, it is not our province or that of the legal gentlemen who wrote the article in "the Herald, to tax the fees of Messrs. Rees and Hislop, and it is not only in bad taste, but positively impertinent and unjust, for the writer in the Herald to attempt by offering opinions while the Crown Prosecutor and Mr. Ward are engaged in taxing the bill of costs to influence their decision. The matter is in good hands, and, if wc mistake not, both Mr. Hag«:itt and Mr. Ward will not thank the officious and disappointed writer for his interference at this juncture. As we approach the end of the article, we see additional evidence of the annoyance that we have caused some person in not having placed our case in his hands. The L 2117 1-Js. seems to make his mouth water and act like a piece of red rag held up to the gaze of an infuriated bull. We did not intend to give offence, and wished to cast no slur "on the ability of the Dunedin lawyers, many of whom we thoroughly appreciate; indeed, when in Wellington, and at the conclusion of our "trial" before the Bar of the House, we offered the case to Mr. Stout, but he, not possessing the knowledge of our mentor of the Herald, referred us to Mr. Rees. whose acquaintance with native land transactions, he said, would be valuable under the circumstances ; and Mr. Jonks subsequently requested Mr. Hislop to act in conjunction with Mr. Rees, which he consented to do. It is childish to attempt to draw an analogy between Mr. Lusk'.s position last session and that which Messrs. Rees and Hislop now occupy. Both gentlemen, when Mr. Jones asked the Houso .o inquire into his case, supported that, course, and warned the House against the proceedings that they subsequent instituted ; and, more than this, Mr. Hislop, up to a short time before the trial came oil', was in favor of otherwise sr-ttiing the matter if possible. The facts nf the case are far too patent, and we sh<.aid think that Mtssrs. Rees and | Hislop will only feel ;..-.•• od at the I puerile attempt on the part of soma jealous brother to damage th :" ;•<:•■ >uHtions. If we were Messrs. "d Hi.--f.op wc would challenge the Ik;— •■ ■° publish the bill of costs, and to do their worst. We have forwarded 500 copies of the Mail containing our reply to the article in the Herald, in order that each subscriber to that paper may get one.