Untitled

Taranaki Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 7003, 1 March 1886, Page 2

Some time back wo had occasion to refer to tho unsatisfactory Btate of the law, ns respects the punishment melcd out to people of worthless character who might bo convicted of malicious prosecution. An instance of the necessity for somo amendment in the direction of providing a greater deterrent than a fino for this species of personal persecution occurred to-day in Court, when one of our leading settlors was called upon to answer to a charge of perjury. Tho charge was preferred by an individual to whom none engaged in the Court proceedings could bring themselves to refer in at all complimentary terms. In fact Mr. Samuel, tho counsel for tho defence, said ho felt he could scarcely control., himself sufficiently to venture to describe in a proper and strong manner tho utter abhorrenco and contempt ho entertained for the person who had made the charge. Ho only regretted tho law did not allow such a man to be punished criminally instead ~of by civil , procedure. His Worship pointed out that tho only proceedings that could be taken for malicious prosecution were civil, and that if the person proceeded against were convicted ho could bo fined, but if ho had no property he would escape punishment, ns there was no imprisonment alternative in default of tho fine. Mr. Samuel iutimated that he would take steps to impress upon his fellow-members of tho House of Representatives the necessity for au alteration in tho law, and he would endeavor to have a change iv the direction indicated effected during the corning session,