TELEGRAPHIC.
PEU iNGLO-AUSTBAIIAN PRESS TELEGRAPH AQENCr. Anotlier Fire at Auckland. Auckland, Friday Night. A desteuctivs firs broke out at one o’clock this morning. It burnt a block, from the foot of Wakefield street to the Pacific Hotel, of 15 buildings, namely : Aiey, watchmaker ; Woodward, baker ; French, grocer : Travil, watchmaker ; Ale Mas ter, draper ; Francis, crockery dealer : Bed fern, photographer; Brooks, shoemaker ; Giles, butcher; Hopkins, chemist ; I>uffy, grocer ; Eastdown, baker ; and a cottage belonging to Mr O. J. Stone, in Rutland street. .J* re was stopped by the brick wall of the Pacific Hotel on the north side, and Rutland street on the south. It commenced in the upper storey of either Francis’ or Giles’ shops- The damage is estimated at £IO,OOO. Insurances : Royal, £2,300 ; Now Zealand, £600; South British, £650; Victoria, £800; Norwich Union, £375 ; National, £500; Liverpool and London, £650 ; Scottish Commercial, £IOO, The sale of Waikato lands took place to-day. Te Awamutu and Cambridge village allotments realised high prices. The Tauranga allotments were not sold. The Whakatane allotments brought the upset prices. The Provincial Council has not discussed any important business yet. Latest English Cablegrams. London, April 21. The German tri’ unal have sentenced th Bishop of Vaney to two jears’ imprisonment fo hostile pastoral. The Reichstag has closed. The Emperor’s
speech was strongly pacific. The motion of Or ICenealy’s for a new trial of the Tichborne Claimant was refused.
New Yoke, April 21. Agricultural department ; It is reported that the American wheat crop is unusually promising, and the area under crop lias increased eight per cent.
April 22. There have been disastrous Innundations in Louisiana through the Missiasipi overflowing, It destroyed the preparations around the city. Lokdoh, April 22. The coal and iron masters of Wales have given their men notice preparatory to a reduction of wages.
April 2*l. The agricultural lock-out is spreading. A meeting sympathising with the labourer we 3 held at Exeter Hull. Harvest prospects are favorable. Money steady. The failure 01 Messrs Whitworth, of Halifax with liabilities amounting to £200,000, led to the suspension of three Yorkshire wool staplers. Johu Bagner. Indian merchant, Manchester has failed with liabilities of £2U0,000. „ Nkw lohk, April 2-1. trrant re.used to sanction the bill inflating currency. 6 Special Government Message. An Important Question. IiYii;iSt,XKGTOJ4, Tuesday Afternoon. The Commissioner of J elcgraphs forwards this memo with his compliments : As the proceedings which are taking place in the case of Macassey v. Beil have occasioned doubt ns to the power of the telegraph department to preserve telegrams from scrutiny when litigants desire to obtain information which may possibly aid them in pending suits, we have been reoucsied by the Telegraph Commissioner to briefly explain what has taken place in reference to the case in question. It is first, however, necessary to say that whether or not such a power should exist. The law unquestionably enables a litigant to compel the production of telegrams which are specified and described in the subpoena calling for their production, provided, of course, that they relate to the suit and affect the parties thereto, and that if they were letters they would not be privileged, lu the present instance the question is : whether unspecified telegrams are liable to be produced in Court, and also whether they are liable to be inspected before production in Court ? By unspecified telegrams is meant a general reference to any telegram that may have passed between different persons, such reference being evidently made in ignorance of any particular telegram, but under the assumption or supposition that there have been some telegrams relevant to the matter. It may further be explained that the order to inspect before trial unspecified telegrams, or indeed specified telegrams, as far as the department is aware, is without precedent. There is one precedent at least for a subpoena to produce unspecified telegrams in Court—in the case of the Taunton election. In that case the telegraph officer appeared with the telegrams in Court, but was instructed to object to produce them. Being a witness only he could not have the matter argued by counsel, but the Judge upheld the objection, expressly, however, instructing that the decision was not to be regarded as a precedent. In the case of Macassey v. Beil, the plaintiff obtained an order to allow tha plaintiff or his solicitor to inspect all telegrams relating to the sub* ]eet matter of this action, without even specifying the persons between whom they passed, and thus making it necessary to expose telegrams passim* between a number of persons, some of them not parties to the suit, and some of them standing in the relation of clients and attorneys to each other A subpoena was also served for an officer of the department to produce unspecified telegrams in Court. The names of some of the persons between whom the telegrams ware supposed to have passed were specified in the subpeena ; of these two were not parties to the suit, and the department have since been informed they stood in the relation of solicitors and client, and this solicitor was solicitor to the defendant. The department nt once decided not to take any notice of the Judge’s order. The plaintiff was given to understand that such was the determination arrived at, but he took no further stops to enforce the order. Some time subsequently a rule nisi was obtained by the defendant to upset toe order, but with that the Commissioner had nothing to do. He had already decided to contest , e .. °.^ er 011 behalf of the department if the plaintiff attempted to enforce it. In respect to the subpoena it was first decided to adopt the course pursued in the Taunton case, namely, to take the telegrams into Court, but to refuse to produce them unless the Judge ordered their production. It was, however, expressly arranged with the plaintiff that the fact of the search being made in order that the telegram should be ready for production was not to prejudice the objection to be offered in Court against the subpoena. The telegram indicated m the subpoena were sent to Dunedin, but subqnently, when it was considered that the case could not be argued in Court on behalf of the department, and that, therefore, the Court would not decide more than in the Taunton case, namely, the point in the particular case ; and when it was further considered how important it was to have at once decided the point a a to whether the production of unspecified telegrams 13 compelled the Telegraph Commissioner took pooceedings prior to the trial, to test the sufficiency and force of the subpoena, but Mr Justice Chapman decided in that procedure that on various grounds the objection could nob be urged on behalf of the telegraph office or the department, but only by the defendant at the trial. The Telegraph Commissioner then came to the conclusion to instruct the officer to refuse to produce the telegram so that on a rule to attack the witness for contempt being proved, the telegraph department, might, or the argument, urge that there is not power to subpoena an officer to produce unspecified telegrams. It will be then seen that the department is jealously guarding the secrecy of the telegraph, and is determined to do go, unless after argument, the Supreme Court and Appeal Court decide tDiat the law otherwise requires. Weiylin gtojt, Tuesday night. The papers say Sullivan will reach England probably in a few weeks, and justifies the course the Govern merit took in the matter as usual and proper. If newspapers had a jueter conception of the merits of the case Sullivan would not have been shut out from proceeding to San Francisco. 1 he authorities there would have been aquainted of his coming and character, just as the English authorities are already. The Government adopted tbe course only after the case had received The highest consideration possible to give it iu the colony
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BOPT18740506.2.9
Bibliographic details
Bay of Plenty Times, Volume II, Issue 173, 6 May 1874, Page 3
Word Count
1,322TELEGRAPHIC. Bay of Plenty Times, Volume II, Issue 173, 6 May 1874, Page 3
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.