SEQUEL TO A COURT CASE

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2822, 13 July 1916, Page 8

SEQUEL TO A COURT CASE

NEWSPAPER PBOPBIETOBS' PETITION. The petition of W. ,T. Geddis and Yv. Blomlield. newspaper proprietors, asking for relief in regard lo the costs incurred by tlieni in 1913 in being called upon to show cause before (lie full Court why they should not be committed to prison for contempt of Court in connection with the publication in an Auckland paper of a. cartoon, entitled "Justice is not Hlind," was reported upon by tho A to 1 Petitions Committee in the House of Representatives yesterday. The petitioners stated that the Court cf Appeal decided that the law upon which the prosecution was founded was obsolete, but that although successful in Court they had not yet been refunded the substantial costs to which they were put in defending the case. The committee reported that in its opinion the petition should be referred to tho Government for favourable consideration, and petitioners should be refunded in full all legal expends. Mr. A. Harris, a member of the A to L Petitions Committee, said that owing to a misunderstanding regarding the time of the meeting he and other members had not been present. The Minister of Internal Affairs, who was absent at Auckland, and who was the Minister in charge of the committee, had expressed a desire to be present when tho petition was considered by the comniM.iee. He thought that the report should be referred back to the committee. -Mr. C. H. Poole said that the unanimous decision of the live members of the committee who were present was et[ii.al, in the eyes of the law, to a decision of'the full committee. Ho saw no reason why the report should be referred back. Mr. 11. A. Wright supported the request that the report be referred bock to the committee. Last year b.e said the committee had no recommendation to make in regard to the petition. This year some'of the members had been absont from the committee meeting through a misunderstanding as to the time of the meeting. ■ Air. H. Poland said that there was no reason -why the report should be referred back. The action which gave rise to the petition would not have been lost but for an error on the part of the Crown Law Department. , Mr. G. Witty said that it was complained that the committee had met at 10 instead of 10.30 a.m., but the decision of the committee was not arrived nt until after 10.30 a.m. Mr. Harris and Mr. Wright: That is not • correct. lMr. Witty said there was no reason why the report, should be referred back because the Minister in charge of the committee was away "■gallivanting with other people." Jlr. .1. Vigor Brown, chairman of the committee, said that the meeting of the committee had been culled for 10 o'clock, but tho, meeting did not conclude till M minutes to 11. The motion for the adoption of the report was carried.