SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3498, 9 May 1874, Page 2

SUPREME CO URT.

Saturday, Mat 9. .Mr Macassey (cross-examinatioli continued) : Mr Barton told me that in all the cases taken into Court by the Chinese before , Mr Beetham, there was no chance of getting a verdict. I made no inquiry, but took Mr Barton’s- word for it. He had no distinot belief in the subject. . ■ His Honor : The more proper question would have been witness’s belief at the time. Witness; I did not ask Mr Barton or others whether there were just grounds for the complaints the Chinese preferred against Mr Beetham. . Mr Malaghan told me he was supporting me, but he made different statements to other people, so I cannot say who- e ther he was a supporter of me or not. I know that if all the electors who he and others said would vote for me bad done so, I should have been returned—therefore I entertain doubts of his sincerity. Mr Malaghan holds a high position in the district, and is greatly respected. It was Mr Haugh- •, ton who gave me a letter of introduction to Ur .Douglas, asking that the latter would

use any influence in his power to promote my election. I cannot say whether Dr Dong as is highly respected in the district; he holds a highly important position. I have not frequently applied to this Court for rules to show cause why editors of newspapers should not be attached. I have done so in three instances—in Stuart v. Miller, Cameron v. ‘Otago Daily Times,’ and Regina v. Henningham—and these extended over nine years practice. I did move that the editor and directors of the ‘ Guardian ’ company sh uld be attached on account of a recent article in that paper—it contained statements damaging to me, therefore I moved for the attachment of tha directors of that company. I did move against Mr Millar, because he had a Certain conversation with Mr W. D Murisou, under instructions L received from my client Mr Stuart, then of the Bank of New. South Wales Mr Miller was mulcted in costs, not at my instance, but at that of my client. I might just as well say that'you (Kir Smith) sympathised with the poisoning of Mrs Jarvey because you conducted the case in defence of her husband. My partners, Messrs Holmes and Chapman, conducted my business and looked after my interests while I was in England. If I had not been absentMr Bell would never have written that article—or, I should say, that article would never have appeared in the Star. I have too much respect for, and toohigh ah opinion of Mr Bell—l had too much respect for him tp think that it emanated from him. By Air Barton; Mr Barton spoke to me about the petition some time befpre i knew Mr Beetham’s feelings me. In Stuart v. Miller and Cameron v. ‘ Otagp Daily Times Mr Smith was the ppppsing counsel j ju Regina v. Henningham yon, f think, werp the opposing coqnsel. The foreman asked his Honor, on' behalf of many of the jury, if they wight retire for a few minutes to see if they could arrive at a decision. His Honor thought it could scarcely be done—but perhaps counsel on both sides might be agreeable. Mr Smith : In a case of this description, your Honor, where the liberty of the Press is at stake, I think it would not, be right that it should go to the jury without our remarks. His Honor: I think the same, Mr Smith—the case should receive my comments. Mr Smith : Mr Beetham has to be recalled, als® j and I must say I am excessively surprised that the other side has not called Mr G. B. Barton, who has been sitting in this Court so long. 1 shall most certainly comment upon that bye-and-bye. His Honor : Yes ; yoU can do so. Mr : Well, perhaps we will not wait for Mr Beetham. I would make this proposition, your Honor—lhat the case be cons?nmet* as an< l that it be adjourned till Tuesday. This would consult the convenience of the jury, by allowing them to attend to their correspondence. His Honor; Give them time to chew the cud, in fact. Mr Smith : No, your Honor—l said to attend to their mail correspondence. His Honor ; Uh, I beg your pardon, I understood you to mean the correspondence in the case. Mr Barton: I must object to the adjournment. lam quite ready, and my learned friend merely wishes time to prepare him* self. . This closed the plaintiff’s case.