IMPORTANT LIBEL CASE.

Observer, Volume II, Issue 44, 16 July 1881, Page 489

IMPORTANT LIBEL CASE.

REES V. WICKHAM.

(Specially Reported for the "Observer.") The Supreme Court-house was densely packed in every part on Wednesday morning, when the trial of John Dickson Wickham, on two criminal charges of libel, came on. The "devil's own " paraded in force, on the front benches, while the rear was covered by the sucking Blackstones of Auckland. Behind the bar the Court-house was crowded with a motley assemblage of the general public, and a privileged few occupied the row of seats behind the reporters. A crowd of persons, mostly witnesses in the case, stood inside the folding doors. O'Brien, the hospitable superintendent of the rural home at Mount Eden, sat calm and impurtable in the carved box on the other side of the court, and Superintendent Thompson, his coadjutor, was as usual behind the bar, apparently absorbed in the study of a very formidable Criminal Calendar. Wickham, in the familiar suit of grey tweed, stood _in the dock, leaning upon the front in an attitude of keen watchfulness, and with an expression of gloom on his face. Occasionally he rested on his elbow and stroked his moustache in a nervous way. The two constables flanking the Judge's Bench stood throughout the day as motionless as Horse Guardsmen, with the crown-tipped rods erect. Mr Hurst sat with a look of virtuous innocence on his noble and manly features, occasionally casting an admiring glance upon a glossy belltopper which he had placed on the desk in front of him. Mr G. M. Reed, who took up his quarters in the Pressbox, occasionally manifested his interest in the case by whispered comments and the perusal of memoranda in his note-book. The indictment read by the Registrar was some three feet by Uvo, and set out all the alleged libels against William John Hurst with which the pubSc are familiar. A lengthy argument then ensued between Messrs. Hesketh and Tyler, retained by Mr Lusk for the solicitor, and Messrs. Browning and A. Whitaker for the defence, as to the admissibility of the pleas of justification, and as to whether the rumours alluded to in the alleged libellous article were actually in circulation at various times. His Honor, however, ruled that the mere fact that such rumours had been in circulation would not justify publication. To publish that the prosecutor was accused of certain acts by public rumour was tantamount to alleging that those rumours were true. The accused had no right to publish a libellous statement because someone else said it, nor would the fact that the statements had been published in another paper, and that the person referred to had taken no proceedings against the publisher, justify another person in republishing the libel. If justification was pleaded the accused must be prepared to prove that the prosecutor actually committed the alleged acts. This ruling caused Mr Browning to collapse into his seat; but after a brief consultation with Mr Whitaker, the latter asked for an adjournment in order to prepare another for that which the Court had ruled to be bad. Mr Tyler, however, contended that even if defendant alleged the truth of the statements contained in the libel, it could not be held that it was for the public benefit to rake up old offences committed IS or 20 years ago. His Honor said, "If a person has been guilty of such crimes, it would be justifiable for the public good to endeavour to maintain the purity of the Bar and the House of Parliament, if he were to prove that the person had been guilty of these crimes, and had escaped justice all this time. At the sametime it would not be sufficient merely to publish a rumour, because that would be an aggravation of the offence. " Mr Hesketh did not oppose the adjournment, and his Honor reminded defendant's counsel of the serious consequences to which they rendered themselves liable if they pleaded the truth of the allegations but failed to substantiate the plea. The case was then adjourned until Thursday. The Registrar having announced the adjournment of the case, the Court crier, with premature zeal, and in stentorian tones, proclaimed the Court adjourned until ten o'clock next day, whereupon he was extinguished by one of those withering looks of his Honor's. The second information by W. L. Rees was then proceeded with. Another formidable indictment covering several square feet was read, charging Wickham with endeavoring to bring Rees into public infamy and contempt by writing certain malicious and defamatory libels in the Lance. The article charged Rees with extracting money from the Belfast settlers by false pretences, with acting dishonestly, and contorting the true meaning of the law. A plea of "Not guilty" Avas put in by Messrs Whitaker and Browning for the accused, and Mr Tyler prosecuted. Mr Wickham was accommodated with a seat, and there was a rapid exodus of the public, who were disappointed at not being regaled with the expected scandals in the former case. The jury were critically scrutinised as they took their seats, and the defendant's counsel challenged three. The Registrar was about to read the long indictment again, when his Honor suggested that it should be taken as read. Mr Tyler's address in opening the ease was confined to a brief definition of the law of libel under Lord Campbell's Act, and of the points upon which the prosecution rested. Mr Rees was then examined at great length as to the transactions in connection with the Pouawa Block, comprising between 19,000 and 20,000 acres. He admitted having induced the native owners to make a deed of trust over this land to him, and to acknowledge the receipt of £12,000 when not a single copper had been paid ; that Judges Heale and O'Brieh refused to subdivide the land until a former lease had been cancelled ; that the Belfast immigrants were on the land, but had received no titles, though he had entered into an agreement with Mr Reed to sell the land to these immigrants. Mr Tyler handed to Mr Rees a bound copy of the Free Lance, and the witness proceeded to select choice morceaux reflecting upon himself, which he read with the utmost sang froid. In these extracts Mr Rees

was spoken of as "the notorious legal functionary ; " upon which witness observed, "That's me." It was stated that he "had escaped being sent to gaol on a charge of obtaining money under false pretences;" that " the old Koman, J. S. Macfarlane, had gone to Gisborne to put Bees through the mill ;" and that by obtaining the postponement of a certain trial at Wellington, Rees "had simply loosened the halter round his vile neck for a few weeks." He was called "a penniless, worthless lawyer," a "rascally lawyer" who who had been "slated" and "run to earth." The writer threatened to administer " a few more kicks to him " because of his " reptillian progress in the black art of repudiation " and "legal atrocity ;" and the attention of the Law Society was directed to his concfuct, with the view of striking him off the roll; whereat, Mr Tyler, in a tone of horror, exclaimed, " You need not read any more," and Rees, with the same calm self-posses-sion, observed, "Well, I'm used to it." Mr G. M. Reed was then examined at some length, and emphatically contradicted ?all the material allegations in the alleged libellous articles. Defendant's counsel called no witnesses for the defence, and Mr Tyler addressed the jury, arguing that the question for their consideration was whether the article contained only fair comment in a matter of public interest, or was published without malice ; and he Avas proceeding to rebut this view by arguments which anticipated the probable defence, when his Honour ruled that he must confine himself to showing that the evidence supported the contention of the prosecution. In the course of his address, Mr Tyler referred to Mr Rees as the owner of the land, his Honour remarked that the evidence went to show that Mr Rees had no title to the land. The libel did not turn upon Rees' professional conduct, but the tendency to_ create a breach of the peace, by bringing him into public contempt and ridicule. During Mr Tyler's address, the Court crier, gaoler O'Brien, and a lawyer's clerk indulged in a siesta, and the Registrar went out to refresh. Mr Tyler, in the course of his address, referred to certain "facts' which were untrue, being evidently rather hazy as to the real meaning of the word "fact. He was, however, frequently interrupted by Mr Whitaker, when he travelled beyond the evidence, and on one occasion he remarked that he laboured under great difficulty, which drew from his Honour the observation, "Yes, when you take an unusual course." "Does your Honour say that I am taking an unusual course ?" "I did not say so," rejoined Judge Gillies, " the authorities say so; you seem to forget that this is not a civil case;" after which, Mr Tyler, with a few more unimportant remarks, collapsed, having made, on the whole rather a very weak and self-damaging speech. Mr Whitaker, in his address for the defence, waxed quite pathetically eloquent over the rights of the native owners of the Pouawa Block, which he contended was " the property of the public," and he also depicted, in striking colours, the wrongs inflicted on the Belfast immigrants, who were disappointed in not obtaining titles to the land promised them. He referred to Mr Rees as being engaged in "gigantic land-sharking," and in the formation of a company to buy up the whole of the native lands in the East Coast. In conclusion, Mr Whitaker set up the very ingenious argument that no malice was shown by the accused, but by Mr Rees in laying the present information. After an interval of ten minutes, his Honour summed up, quoting from the judgment in the case of Labouchere, proprietor of Truth. The whole foundation of an indictable libel appeared to turn upon the question Avhether the words used were such as to bring the prosecutor into such hatred, ridicule, and contempt as to cause a breach of the peace. There were cases, said his Honour, in which it would be the duty of the Press to cast hatred, ridicule, and contempt upon men who committed crimes and breaches of trust, but care should be takezi the writer was well informed, and that no malice was shown. The jury would have to consider whether or not the matter commented upon was public or private ; and it was admitted in this case that the prosecutor had made the matter public by addressing public meetings on the subject, and issuing pamphlets. It \vas also a question whether all dealings Avith native lands by private individuals should not form the subject of public criticisms, having regard to the importance of those transactions in the North Island. If it Avas the intention of the article to sheAV that the lands should have been placed in the hands of a public trustee and not a private trustee, the jury avouM be justified in finding that it A\ r as no libel, unless the jury Avere of opinion that this had been made the pretext for a malicious attack upon Mr Rees, and that the article passed the bounds of fair comment. His Honour Avas of opinion that it had been clearly proved that Mr Rees had no title to the PouaAva Block, and that the judges had refused to issue a sub-division order, Avhich Avas necessary to create a title, and that refusal Avas supported by the Supreme Court, Avliich held that the trust deed Avas not a legal conveyance for a valuable consideration. It might be assumed that the charge of " false representations" to the "strangers" to extract large sums of money, consisted in inducing the Belfast settlers to locate themselves upon the block before any title had been secured, Avith the object of obtaining money from them to buy the land from the natives. His Honour considered the Avords ' ' unscrupulous " and _ ' ' fraud " unnecessarily strong expressions, Avliich Avere not justified by the facts as adduced in evidence. Commenting ujDon the allegation that prosecutor had used " false promises, bribery, and threats" to obtain signatures to the trust deed, his Honour said the jury would have to consider whether that allegation was a malicious libel or Avhether it was made in a general sense by a person not fully informed. It did appear from the evidence that though the Trusts Court had not approved of the deed, some of the lands had been mortgaged by Mr Rees, that none of the properties had been redeemed, and that no account had been, rendered by the trustee, His Honour Avas of opinion that this mode of dealing with native lands demanded public criticism and the attention of the Legislature. The

jupy would have to consider whether the defendant was actuated by a desire for the public food or by a personal animus against Mr Rees. Ir Tyler asked his Honour to direct the jury to consider the effect which the language of the article would produce upon the minds of ordinary readers. ,His Honour was not prepared so to direct. The jury must consider whether the motive Avas a personal one or for the public good, and they must judge, not from any portion, but from the whole of the article. The jury retired at 5.20 p.m. to consider their verdict, the foreman bearing a file of the Free Lance. At 6.3 p.m. they returned into Court Avith a verdict of "Not guilty." Mr Browning asked for costs, which, it is noAV understood, Avill follow judgment. This of coiirse means not only that Mr Wickham escapes Avithout, so to speak, a stain upon his literary character, but that Mr Rees Avill have to pay about £100 costs. We congratulate our contemporary on the result of the action, and also the Press generally, which would. have received a severe blow had Wickham been convicted.