THE SECRET CASE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1081, 21 March 1911, Page 6

THE SECRET CASE.

•• ——. . ( FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS. ; INTERVIEWS WITH COUNSEL, c SECRECY THROUGHOUT. I i ' C Following "P our inquiries' in"regard to . the order which was' supposed to havo I been made.by'a'judgo.orjndfces.of . the Supreme Court forbidding the-newspapers | to publish any reference to a certain case, i a Dominion reporter waited yesterday upon counsel for eacli of the parties, and j had a further interview with the Regis- j trar of the Court. The order was not forthcoming, but some interesting state- ' ments were obtained. They are given be- j low. ] THAT ELUSIVE DOCUMENT. 1 . . , FOUR QUESTIONS. j A "LETTER TO COUNSEL. 1 Four questions were drawn up for. sub- j 'nission to counsel on each side of the j !Sase. They will be found in the following letter, which the reporter handed personally to counsel for the defendant:— j The Dominion Editorial 'Department, " Wellington, N.Z., March 20, 1911. C. H. Treadwell, Esq. (Stafford and Treadwell), 8 Panama Street, City. Dear Sir—My paper, Tiik Dominion, requires to know exactly what was the order mode by. the.judge.in the 1 case,< so, that it may be 'able to judge' what, has • been forbidden in the matter of reports or allusions to the case in the newspapers. The Registrar of the. Court has referred me to counsel ■ for the parties, and I understand that you are counsel for the person in whose, interest the order is supposed to have been made. I shallbe obliged if yon will tell me:— ~ > j (t) Will you supply me with the i order formally drawn up and com- ■ ' pleted? j (2) If you cannot supply me with, the i order, will you kindly, put me in the I way of obtaining same? '< (3) If it is a fact that : no order has ' .been formally drawn/ up, , will you • kindly s.upply mo with note' of the ■ • terms of the-order, and-the name of- ■ the judge who granted it, and the 1 date? .. ■ (■4) Is it your wish that publication ! should still be .forbidden?. . ..Please note . that Tue Dominion holds : itself free to publish aify reply you make ( to this communication. The same questions as above (1 to 4) are being put to - Mr. A. W. Blair. : , , . i Should these inquiries prove abortive, I shall consult with my editor as to the ' propriety of acting on the assumption that no order referring to'publication has " ever been made in the case. . " i 1 am, 1 ; Yours faithfullv, \ S. V. BRACHER, ■ , Reporter. . i WHAT MR. TREADWELL SAID WOULDN'T- BE CATECHISED. The.- recipient of thfe above document. : hiving.perused it,''in' the presence of the signatory,' the following conversation took piace:— Mr. Treadwell: I don't want to bo dis- . courteous to you or any other newspaper man, but I don't see why "I should be catechised about a matter relating to a client, especially , after,' what I told you the. other day. .(You took no notice of that, .but a statement calculittM;.Vo*'do injuryi to.my. client. The reporter (after.a pause): Have you auything further tp say? Mr. Treadwell; Why,'should I?.;., Reporter: We' are* concerned• • inthis order, and we think we are entitled to it. • Mr. Treadwell: I'm sorry you should bo under such an erroneous impression. Reporter: As to think ■ that the order affects us? % - Mr.'Treadwell: not going to talk to you. I told you before what the position was, and instead of doing a fair thing and leaving the matter alone—you didn't. Reporter (smiling): L think I may say, Good.' afternoon? ' '. ' . ' .Mr. Treadwell (smiling back): I think bo—yes. [Mr. Treadwell, having referred as above to something he. had previously told the same reporter, it is.necessary to state hero that the only previous communication between these two individuals in reference' to the case under consideration occurred in the Supreme Court Buildings on Friday last. During the conversation that then took place, the reporter invited Mr. Treadwell to dictate a statement for publication. • The -invitation • was declined. The reporter then offered to take down a statement-for tho private l information of the editor. ' This offer also:'was declined by Mr. Treadwell. We did not leave the matter alone as Mr. Treadwell "apparently thinks should have been, done, firstly, because nothing he.said warranted our doing so, and secondly, because we wero of the opinion that tho matter was one which should-bo mado public.] LETTER FROM MR. TREADWELL. THE BUSINESS OF HIS CLIENT. Later in the afternoon,, tho following letter was received at this office:— March .20, 1911. The Editor, Dominion Newspaper, Wellington. Dear Sir,—One of your reporters has handed, me a letter bearing to-day's dale in' which he solicits certain information about-a case in which ..I have been, engaged in the Supremo Cburt. It is a' wellknown rule, of which you. must be aware, that no. barrister or solicitor engaged in any 5 case can disclose tho business of his client to anyone. 1 have, therefore,'declined to give your reporter-the informa--1 tion asked for in his letter.—Yours truly, C. H. TREADWELL. ;' ' [Our readers can judge for themselves whether or not Mr. Treadwell was asked to improperly'disclose the business of his client, as his letter would seem' to suggest.] . ;COUNSEL FOR THE PLAIN-' TIFFS. "NO FORMAL ORDER." WILL NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS.' The four questions contained in tho letter to Mr. Treadwell, and not answered by him, were also put to Mr. A. TO, Blair, counsel for the plaintiffs. Ho dictated the following statement by way of ieply:— "I agree with what the registrar - said, as reported in -your' paper this moruing, namely, that, no formal order has vet beer, drawn up, and I do not tlunk that I can be called upon to answer any of the specific questions 1 put to me." BACK TO THE REGISTRAR. STILL NO ORDER. WO NOTE OF IT IN HIS MINUTE BOOK. The next step was to seek out tho Regis- * trar of the Court (Mr. D. G. A. Cooper) anil tell him that his advice to see counsel in tho case had been followed, and that the order was still not forthcoming. He indicated that ho was not surprised. "The order has been made," said Mr. Cooper, "but thcro was no necessity to draw it up and havo it sealed, so I suppose that is tho reason why they have not dono so." "What can I do now to get it?" asked the. reporter.

"I..don't see how you can get it, if neither of the parties will do anything in the matter," was the answer. In reply to -further questions, Mr. Cooper stated that the order was nuule iii the'last instance on Monday or Tuesday of last week (March IS or. It) by the Chief Justice. "Cau- I-have a note of the terms of the Order?" , "I didn't- tako a -note in the minutebook, because there was no necessity. It was merely an application that the proceedings be taken, in Chambers, instead pfin;open court, and the. Chief Justice acceded to tlie request." "Was nothing said about forbidding publication of the naines of the parties?" "Of course that follows." Why does it follow "of course" in this case, seeing that we are allowed to report other cases in Chambers? "You are only allowed to do so as a matter of- courtesy, and if, when you happen to bo there, anything comes up that tho parties ask you not to report, the reporters have always respected such a request. The Christohurch 'Press' exactly expresses the position in an extract which appears in your paper this morning." Am I to gathej' that there was no order 'made until last week? " "Oh, yes! tlie-'o was. In each of tho particular proceedings in this case there has been an application for it to be hoard in camera,-and on each-occasion the request, has been acceded . to."<Should I bo right in savi'rig that when a case is taken in Chambers, it is sufficient for a judgo to give a verbal direction that nothing is to bo published? "Yes." The reporter, remarked that he did not seem to be getting much Jjparer to an opportunity of seeing tho ortler. "I'm afraid you're not," said tho Registrar. ' ' TO-DAY. FURTHER 'PROCEEDINGS EXPECTED. I It is understood that some further proceedings liefo^o.,^tlis - C.liie£ i^l Justice will take place''tTiis- rnornnig;""-' SITTINGS IN CHAMBERS. [To the Editor-1 .Sir,—Your remarks on-secret- justice will do some good if the, curb is put on ' hearings in Chambers"' tjiatjiavq; gained such root under' the present regime. Judges sometimes forget what they have said in Chambers, and they must not be reminded of it iii'court afterwards. Matters are taken in'Chambers'that shouM. according ■to the law, bo heard in court only. Let me..refer to a certain defendant who'.appeared ,iu person Jn answer to a summons.*£o -ba heard iii Chambers before the Chief Justice. The defendant told his"Honour: "This matter ought not to be taken in Chambers at all, but in open court." Tho Chief Justico replied: "We do these things in Chambers in New Zealand." He, however, adjourned t'te matter'in order'to enable the. plaintiff's counsel to find some authority for his procedure. The same matter came on again the same afternoon, but the defendant Was. tired of, dancing attendance in Chambers, and did not attend. The registrar Tang-up the. defendant to say his Honour was. waiting.. Defendant did not go, so the Chief Justice gave bis decision in' favour of tho absent defendant, and ordered the ease to be removed into court. It may be said hearings in Chamber, are economical. The- reply - is: "Cheap and dangerous." Hearing in Chambers often enables one sidoto steal a march, and notice of hearing is much too short. On one occasion, I had to, complain of receiving, nti notice except/a news item sent, by'the registrar to the papers, that may have been easily overlooked. The matter' want's attention, ■ as this Chamber business is'nuite-contrary to' British justice. It is too arbitrary, done generally in haste, with a lot of' other cases in the same day that. must, operate on the mind of any mail. .Tudpe or not, henco the frequent mistakes.—l am, etc., DEFENDANT. Wellington, March 20, 1911.