The Action Against Sir Arthur Gordon.
DAMAGES AWABDED TO MR HUNT.
[Pbb Pbbss Association.] WELLINGTON, July 20. In the Supreme Court the case Hunt v. Gordon was resumod to-day.
His Honor, in summing up, said the jury must clearly understand the nature of tho causes from whioh the action had arisen. It was provided by Order-in-Council that the High Cc_imiß»ioner of tho Western Pacifio should have power to deport any person to any portion of »he Western P*cific. provided it was to a place within tho Western Pacifio, but it so happened that the portion of the olauso under which defendant aoted in deporting plaintiff, did not include Fiji, as it was a British Colony. Fiji was, geographically speaking, within the Western Paoifio. But it waß not so for the purposes of the Act. The question ia the first issue whether defendant had made suoh an order was admitted by defendant. On the second issue, " Did defendant make suoh order wrongfully, maliciously, ond without proper caution ? " they might find it was made wrongfully, as tho placo named was Levuka. If it had been maliciously, that should, perhaps, have formed a separate cause of action. They must find that the deportation of plaintiff was wrongful, but not malicious. Tho next point to consider was, Was plaintiff, on Sept. 6, arrested at Samoa on defendant's ordor? He read to the jury tho evidence of plaintiff on the subjsot of his arrival at Samoa.. They would find that Consul Graves was not the arresting person at all, but Inspector Scanlan, who aoted upon the authority of the High Commissioner. That also anplicd to the detention at Apia. Tho action of Graves was quite a separate thing. An order of prohibition did not describe a man's offence, hut being issued and the man against whom it was directed remaining, thon he beoame an offonder. Mr Shaw had called evidence to show that the warrant was irregular, as the information upon whioh it was iiiusd should have been given upon oath. That was so, for it appeared that the clerk who prepared it had struck out the word oath and inserted " reported to me." 'Ihey would bear in mind that the order of commitment only followed the previous warrant. It was not the objeot of the authorities to subject plaintiff to more imprisonment than was necessary. He waß no doubt in oustody until tho doparture of the German schooner, which took him to Lovuka. As ho was put aboard by Inspector Scanlan, all that they would have to bear in mind waa thut it was under warrant by Graves, not Gordon ; aleo that Hunt was under arrest from tho time he left Apia till ho was liberated at Levuka. The question wbb then, what damages did plaintiff suffer? By reason of tho third count, damages could not properly be given for expulsion from Samoa, for during the period of two yoars he bad no business to be there. When he returned to Samoa plaintiff said he didn't know that the expulsion was legal. They would, however, bear ia mind that ignorauoe of law was no justification of any wrong act. With regard to issues 17, 18 and 19, charging defendant with aosault in September, 1881, they must find that plaintiff was arrested under Graves' warrant.
The jury retired at 2.43 p.m., und after the expiration of three hours came into Court by direction of his Honor, when tho Foreman stated that they were unable to agree. On again returning they brought in a verdict for plaintiff for £100 damages on the 14th issue, adding a rider that the jury regretted that so many issues had been withdrawn from them, under which tbey would have awarded more substantial damages to plaintiff for injuries he has sustained through the powers exercised by defendant. The Court then adjourned till 10 a.m. on Monday.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS18830721.2.26
Bibliographic details
Star (Christchurch), Issue 4750, 21 July 1883, Page 4
Word Count
645The Action Against Sir Arthur Gordon. Star (Christchurch), Issue 4750, 21 July 1883, Page 4
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.