RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3215, 2 June 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, Ist June. (Before J. 0. Crawford, Esq., R.M., and the following J.P.'s— W. M. Bannatyne, W. Dorset, B>. J. Duncan, Captain Sharp). ALLEGED BEEACH OF TELEGEAPH BEGTTLATIONS. Mr Allan, who appeared for Mr Lemon, raised objections to the hearing of the case on several grounds. In the first place he would not allow hie client to surrender on the information produced, inasmuch as it was not pro* perly provon as was required by law. The Beach, of course, could act upon their own responsibility. The information was taken before a Justice of the Peace, who had no authority to take it, and the mere attaching of the signature of Mr A. Buchanan to the document was valueless, unless he was present in Wellington to prove that the information had been taken before him. Therefore, unless they were prepared to produoe the witnesses vi ho had sworn to the information, and the Justice of the Peace who issued the summons, it must be regarded as so much waste paper, and could not be recognised. According to English law, the only documents which could be recogniaed in ouch way were those of the superior courts, and having affixed to them the signature* of the judges of the Supreme Court. Such documents as these were admitted without further proof; but there was nothing in the statute to show that the signatures of magistrates or judges of an inferior Court oould be admitted without the proof necessary in other cases. Mr Allan then quoted authority in support of his objection. Mf Tratebs said that his learned friend, by arranging the previous adjournment of the case, practically admitted the legality of the proceedings. Mr Allan : My client, Mr Lemon, cannot appear unleas Mr Buchanan is called to prove that the information is correct ; and, in making these preliminary objections, I do it merely out of courtesy to the Court, not that I have admitted anything by any previous arrangement. At present the Court has nothing to go upon, as the summons is perfectly innocuous ; and if it wishes to set aside my objection, and act upon their own responsibility, they must issue a warrant for his arrest. Mr Ceaweobd : To sustain your argument, Mr Allen, would simply be altering the whole course of justice provided by law for the colony. It is not to be supposed that justices of the peace who are appointed for the whole colony cannot lay an information for an offence committed in some other part of the colony other than where the offence was committed. Mr Tbavees : I must deoline to offer anj observation on the remarks of Mr Allan. Mr Cbawfobd : I don't know of any law which can sustain the objections of Mr Allan. Mr Allan : Ib is the law of England 5 and it prevails here unless it has been definitely altered by statute, and I know of no such alteration having been made. The law of England says that the signatures of Judges of the Supreme Court shall be admitted without proof; but it does not follow that the signature of a Magistrate in Dunedin can be accepted in the same manner. Mr Tbavebs ! The Court must assume that everything has been properly done, unless the contrary is shown. Mr Allan : You have no evidence to show how the document was transmitted up here. It should have been filed in the Court there, and the record of it shown in order to enable tlm Court to act upon it ; and it therefore becomes necessary to show that this information has been transmitted in the proper way. Mr Ceawfobd : This information has cer« tainly come up in a sort of irregular way, having reached the Court through the counsel for the prosecution. Mr Tbatebs: The information and summons were transmitted to me from solicitors in Dunedin, and did not come to me through the Juatico of the Peace at all. Ad soon as I received it, knowing I was merely a vehicle of transmission in the matter, I immediately handed it to the Clerk of the Court hare. Mr Allan : By referring to clause 66 of the Justices of the Peace Act you will see that when a Magistrate finds it necessary to sond a prisoner to another province, it ia necessary to issue a warrant uader his own hand. In this oase nothing of the kind has been done, the only signature being that of a lawyer's olerk. Mr Tbavebs : As I handed it over to the Magistrate's clerk immediately, I am relieved of all responsibility in the matter. Mr Allan : Tlub is a criminal proceeding, taken for an indictable offence, and it is, therefore, not for me to prove anything, but to see that everything has been done in the proper way. Mr Cbawbohd i The Bench, call upon Mr Lemon to surrender. Mr Allan: Mr Lemon, you are acting under my advice, and I Bay you must not surrender. . *^v Sergeant Monaghan was then called by MP^ Travers, and proved that he served the sum* monß upon Mr Lemon. After which Mr Tbavebs said it was his painful duty to ask for a warrant for the arrest of Mr Lemon. Mr Allan : In that case, Mr Lemon will surrender under protect. There 19, however, another objection which I wish to raise. This Court caunot hear this information. Ab you will observe, it is an information for an indictable offence, and proceedings have not been taken according to clause 47 of the Justice of the Peace Act, 1866. Now, before the information can be taken, and the Bum-

mons issued, it is essential that the Justice of the Peace who takes the information should bo a Justice of the Peace exercising jurisdiction in the place where the offence has been committed. Mr Ceawfoub : Justices of the Peace are appointed for the whole colony. Mr Allan : Yes ; but in a case of this kind the procedure of a Justice of the Peace should be taken in connection with the act which regulates the mode in which they are to proceed. No doubt, if you, or any gentleman now upon the Bench, were in Dunedin, and an information were laid before you againat a person who had committed an offence in Otago, you, while residing there, would be perfectly at liberty to issue a summons against that person. fcSLjt in this ca3e the information is laid before fPfoagistrate in Dunedin, while the alleged offence has been committed in Wellington, a place outside of his jurisdiction, as laid down in clause 66 of the Justice of Peace Act. It will, therefore, be seen that a Justice of the Peace has not that universal power which is contended for, and is only allowed to exercise his functions in the place where he may reBide, and where the offence may have been committed. Mr Crawfobd : Do you mean te say that a magistrate for the Hutt cannot issue a summons for here or elsewhere ? He is a magistrate for the whole colony. Mr Allan : Although they are appointed for the colony, their jurisdiction is curtailed by the Justice of the Peace Act. It must be ehown that the man is residing within the place, or that the offence has been committed in the place, before the law can be set in force. When it was decided that Wellington was the place where Mr Lemon was to be tried, it wbb the duty of the prosecution to have come up here to lay the information. Mr Trayers : My friend is arguing as if the prosecution in this case was for some dreadful crime, such as robbery. The Bench overruled the objection raised by Mr Allen. Mr Allan : I say then, that as the information shows on the face of it that the offence was committed in Wellington, and that as the Justice of the Peace Act does not give authority to a magistrate in another place to act as has been done in this ease (indeed Mr Justice Chapman has decided on this point already), both the information and summons are bad. Mr Crawford : No ; Mr Justice Chapman decided that the case should be tried in Wellington j but not that the summons should not be taken out iv Dunedin. Mr Teatees then stated the ca9e for the prosecution, to the effect that on the 22ud April, 1870, Mr Lemon, the General Manager of the Telegraph Department, did wrongfully and in contravention of the 16th section of the Telegraph Act 1865, supply to William Gisborne, Colonial Secretary, a telegraphic copy of the report of a speech delivered by Mr Stafford at Timaru, on the 21st April. The facts of the case were briefly these : — ■ The " Otago Daily Times" proprietary sent a special reporter to Timaru to take a verbatim report of the speech Mr Stafford was about to deliver, in order that it might be transmitted by telegraph to Dunedin. It has since beon found that that speech was transmitted simultaneously to Wellington. In looking over Mr Gisborne's evidence in the celebrated telegram, libel case, I find that an arrangement had been in contemplation with the " Daily Times" and several journals in the North Island, whereby they might obtain telegraphic summaries of the speech, and it also appears that the Government acted with great liberality in the matter in atlowing the "Times" to telegraph the speech at a moiety of the regular cost ; and were further prepared to supply the northern journals (if they and the " Times" should agree over the arrangements) wiih a verbatim report of the Bpeech at the price agreed upon for the summary. In fact, so far as I can gather, nothing has been charged against the Telegraph Department in connection with this transaction. Assuming, however, that Mr Gisborne's evidence has been correctly represented, the Manager of the Telegraph Department had mentioued to him that he would have the message transmitted to Wellington j and that on the following day, a copy of the message was given to Mr Gisborne. I therefore need only say that the message was delivered at Timaru, for transmission to the "Otago Daily Times," and that simultaneously it was" transmitted to Wellington, and delivered to Mr Gisborne without the authority of the person to whom the mesaage belonged. I shall leave the matter entirely to your Worships as to whether or not an offence has been committed under the act. It is not contemplated by the act that the Telegraph Officer should supply without the authority of the owner a message to any other person, unless of course in the case of legal proceedings when Buch a thing might be rendered necessary j and therefore if an officer of the Department voluntarily furnishes a copy of a message to any other person without the authority of the owner, he must be held to be improperly divulging the contents. Thoreforo, under the circumstances, Mr Lemon must be treated as having been guilty of a breach of the act. I am not here to make any comments, and merely bring these facts before your Worships in order to substantiate the charge. I may now state that an important witness (Mr Walmsly, the operator at Timaru) is on his way here by the Omeo, which, not having arrived, it may be necessary for me to aßk for an adjournment after taking the evidence of Mr Gisborne. Indeed as my friend is as anxious as myself that the case should be terminated as soon as possible, it might perhaps be as well toadjourn it to Buch a time as would enable the matter to be disposed of without being allowed to hang during an indefinite period. Mr Thayees then called William Gisbohne, Colonial Secretary of New Zealand : I held the office of Telegraph Commissioner in April, 1870. I know Mr Lemon; he is General Manager of the Telegraph Department. In April, 1870, I had some conversation with Mr Lemon in reference to a speech about to be delivered by Mr Stafford at Timaru. The conversation was to settle the terms on which a report of the speech might be telegraphed to the " Times" and to other papers. The report had to bo telegraphed at night, and I allowed that they should have it at single rate, though it was usual to charge double for night transmission. The " Times" wanted a verbatim report of the speech, while the other papers only wanted a summary. In order that the speech might be circulated as widely and as Boon as possible, I authorised the manager to offer the northern papers acopy of the speechat the price of the summary. I authorised him at the came time to allow a copy of the telegraphic report to be sent to Wellington, as I learned that one operation would do it. I did that knowing that it would oppear in the •Otago Daily Times" the next morning, and in order that I might, have an opportunity of seeing a copy of the speech. I had no authority from the "Times" for doing so. After the telegram had appeared in print (on the afternoon of the 22nd April) I saw a copy of what purported to be a telegraphic report of Mr Stafford's speech. Nothing was said in delivering it to me. It was part of the arrangement between myeelf and Mr Lemon that an operator should be ready in Wellington to take the speech off, in order that I might see it during the next day. It was brought to my office the next afternoon. . (There is one thing I should like to correct myself on. When giving evidence at Dunedin, from recollection, after a lapse of twelvo months, I said it was Mr Lemon who gave me the message. Subsequently, however, I learned that I was in error in stating so, as it was a Telegraph boy who left it at the office. Directly I glanced over it I put it into my desk, and next day destroyed it in order that it might not fall into other hands.) Mr Allan : Does not the Telegraph Act of 1865 say that the Telegraph Commissioner has entire control over all the telegraphs and telegraphic officials in New Zealand? Mr Gisbobne : Yes,

Mr Allan : Were you, on the 21st April acting as Electric Telegraphic Commissioner when this alleged misappropriation of a message took place ? Me G-I9I3OENE : I was, and had been for some time previous ; and in that capacity all the other officers wore surbordinate to me and bound to obey my directions. Mr Teayebs : Lawful directions. Mr Allan : Bound to obey his directions. Examination resumed : As Telegraph Commissioner, I could examine all the records of telegrams transmitted, copies of which are kept. I might have gone down to the office and looked at the telegrams myself while it was being taken off; or I might have acted as operator did I possess the Decessary skill. As the telegram was of unusual length, and to be transmitted at unseasonable hours, the manager came to take my instruclionsregarding it. I arranged that a copy should be taken off for myself. After glancing at it, I locked it up is my drawer, and the next day burnt it. I was careful in abstaining from speaking about it, bo that nothing should go beyond me as Telegraph Commissioner. When I gavo tho evidence referred to, I gave it as a witness for the defence, in a case taken by the Government against Mr Barton, editor of tho " Otago Daily Times." Mr Macassey, whose name is on the information against Mr Lemon, was the counsel for Mr Barton. When I wa-a in Dunedin, an information was laid by Mr .Barton againßt Mr Lemon, for the same offence ; but I now see it is another person. By Mr Travers : Was ib in your capacity as Telegraph Commissioner that youv order to see the message was given? or was it simply as Minister ? Me Gisboene : Mr Lemon camo to mo for instructions relative to this message, and in the course of the conversation, I expressed my wish to see a copy of tho speech. By Mr Allan : Mr Lemon came to me on the previous day in the ordiuary course of business This closed the examination. Mr Travers then asked that the case might be adjourned till Saturday. A vory important witness, Mr Walmsly, tho Timaru operator, was on board the Omeo, which was expected. The Bench adjourned the case till the following day at eleven o'clock, Mr Lemon to answer to bis own recognisances.