SEQUEL TO COURT DECISION.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 15 December 1925, Page 9

SEQUEL TO COURT DECISION.

Heavy Damages Claimed. DEVELOPMENTS IN DEPORTATION CASES. By Cable—Pre3s Association —Copyright. Australian and .N.Z. Cable . Association (Received December 13, 9.5 p.m.) SYDNEY, December 13. As a sequel to the High Court’s judgment. in the deportation cases, writs havo been issued on behalf of Walsh and Johnson claiming £20,000 each lor wrongful arrest and imprisonment. The defendants are the Commonwealth, Mr Bruce, and Commissioner Yates (head of the Commonwealth Police Force). Writs have also been issued ori behalf of the wives of Walsh and Johnson claiming £SOOO each. Tho latter base their claims on the loss of the service of their husbands, also because of the pain and suffering.

AWAITING COURT’S JUDGMENT. MR BRUCE’S REBUKE. By Cable-—Press Association—CoDyright. Australian an 4 N.Z. Cable Association • MELBOURNE, December 14. Mr' Bruce, commenting on the decision of the High Court in the deportation case, said he regretted the remarks made by certain Labour leaders, as they had introduced the element of party politics into a matter that was solely one of legal interpretation of the powers of the Commonwealth. He intimated that it was impossible in the absence of the reasons upon which the decision, of the court was based to state what action the Government would take to give effect to the Deportation Act. Constitutional authorities, while hesitating to express an opinion regarding the Court’s decision until the Court makes known the grounds for the decision, do not believe that the fclourt found against tho power of the Commonwealth to deport, and express the opinion that they would be very surprised if the judgment meant either that the power to deport did not exist, or that there wero any fresh limits set to the Commonwealth’s power of dealing with trade and commerce generally through the Government’s method of procedure being at fault.

History of Proceedings. The deportation proceedings originated auout tile tniio ol tiie beginning of tlie British seamen s striae in Australian waters. Air Bruce, during August, appealed to Mr Lang, I'remier of New South AVaies, to aiforcl protection to tne loyalists among the British seamen against the striKers. Mr Lang replied that there wus no occasion tor tne appeals, as there had been no disturbance. The Federal, Government proposed to issue-deporta-tion summonses against particular union leaders, but Mr Bang refused to allow officials of tire State of New South Wales to be used to serve tn« summonses. At the end of August me Federal Government, and on Nv--a.a forced through both Chambere the Federal Peace Officers’ Bill, and immediately afterwards a Deportation Board was set up, and summonses were served on Tom Walsh and Jacob Johannsen. Walsh is the general president of the Australian Seamen's Union, and Johannsen is assistant-secretary of the Sydney branch of the same union. On September 3 Walsh and Johannsen appeare 1 in Sydney before the Deportation Board. The summonses set opt that the authorities were satisfied that Walsh and Johannsen were not born in Australia, and had been concerned in Australia in acts directed towards hinderingj to the prejudice of the public, the transport of goods and the conreyance of passengers from other countries and States, and that their presence in Australia would be injurious to peace, order and good govern mens, in respect to which the Con. monwealth Parliament lias powers to make Jaws. They were summoned to show cause why they should not b« deported. The case dragged 'on for weeks, and scores of witnesses were heard. The Board made its report to the Federal Government introduced eember 20, acting on the recommendation of the Deportation Board, Federal officers arrested Walsh and Johannsen and removed them to Garden Islam/ where'they have since been in custody, counsel for the defence immediately applied to the Full Court for a writ »f habeas corpus. A rule nisi was granted. Counsel for the Crown then applied to the High Court to remove the case into its jurisdiction, and this was done. Tho High Court, after hearing argument for more than, n week, has now given its decision.