ALLEGED GRIEVANCES

Waikato Times, Volume 118, Issue 19664, 26 August 1935, Page 8

ALLEGED GRIEVANCES

VENTILATION IN COURT. POSTING OF INDECENT LETTER. CASE IN HAMILTON. The alleged grievance of Leopold Hodgins against Thomas H. Henderson, farmer, of Horsham Downs was again ventilated in the Magistrate s Court, Hamilton, to-day, before Messrs G. Hyde and W. H. Paul, J’s.P., when Leopold Hodgins was charged with posting a packet through the post containing obscene matter. Detective-Sergeant J. Thompson, who prosecuted, said that the charge was brought under the Post and Telegraph Act, 1928, section 106, sub-section E 3, which prohibited any person sending a packet through the post containing any obscene print, photographs, engraving or representation of any kind. Defendant had caused Mr Henderson a great deal of annoyance since 1933, and this month sent him a letter containing mu# 1 unmentionable language. Thomas H. Henderson stated that he bought a farm off the State Advances Department in 1933. This farm had previously been owned by defendant, and sinbe then defendant had caused him considerable anoyance. Detective G. P. Belton said that when interviewed defendant admitted writing and posting the letter. Case for Defence. Mr A. L. Tompkins cohtended that defendant was under the impression that he had a real grievance against Mr Henderson. He was a returnSd soldier who had suffered' from war injuries and after struggling for many years on a farm at Horsham Downs lie had to give the place up. He had lefi several things on the farm that did not belong to the State Advances Department and for these Mr Henderson had paid him £ls. This, contended defendant, was nowhere near enough money. Counsel then added that the writing of a letter with indecent, language contained therein was not an offence under sub-section E 3, of section 106 of the Post and Telegraph Act, 1928. The section definitely stated several specific instances of what should not bo posted but “writing," or “words" were not mentioned in that sub-section. It was, however, specially mentioned in another sub-section indicating that there was a difference " between “ words ” and “ print " and the other speoifle instances. • He advanced several legal opinions and findings to support his claim.

The Bench decided to adjourn the case for a week so that the charge could he heard before a Magistrate.