ACTION FOR LIBEL AT AUCKLAND.

Evening Star, Issue 3503, 15 May 1874, Page 3

ACTION FOR LIBEL AT AUCKLAND.

(From the Southern Cross.) ,_ Tn * he Sup re me Court, Auckland, on April 27, Mr Crimes moved for a rule nisi calling upon Messrs George M’Culloch Meed and Henry Brett, printers and publishers of the Mvenmg Star’ newspaper, published in Auckland, to show cause why a criminal information for libel should nob issue against them. The motion for the rule was on behalf of Captain Wiliam Fraser, Resident Magistrate at the Thames, and was in respect of libel published in three successive o U u m 'in r . S u of t jV Evening Star,’ issued on the inn, 10th, and 11th Aprfl. 'J ho particulars were set forth in an affidavit by Captain Fraser, the articles beina given m full. They were in reference to some remarks made by Captain Fraser when passing sentence of three months’ in prisonment, or a fine of L2OO, upon Thomas Manning, at the Thames, for a breach of the Quartz-crushing Regulations. The portions which were relied upon to support the charge or libel were as follow : that the magistrate who showed such a sympathy with crime as to censure the police in the circumstances to win the plaudits of the roughs in Cour , is a disgrace to the Bench, and should be deprived of Her Majesty 3 Commission are aware how deep the spmpathy felt by scoundrels for this specimen stealing, and we cannot but express our extreme surprise that a magistrate, whose sympathies should be on the side of law and honesty, should have deliberately pandered to the lowest principles of the lowest canaille at the Thames -... He is popular we know at the Thames, and in advocating this course we know we shall give offence. Bat 11 his popularity has been gained by pandering m this way to the lawless sentiments of the rabble, that popularity is a reproach to the administration of justice; and as we care not for the smile or frown of man or devil, we do not hesitate to reiterate that ■ny magistrate, for such an act, should be visited by severity by the Government of the country. ... We read in the telegrams of this morning’s ‘Herald’ that the lhames S.ar has espoused the couse of the specimen stealers and their magisterial symt , • • We believe Mr Fiasei to be himself the wrber of the article in question. ... It is the dutyof the Government to inquire into the conduct of the Resident Magistrate, and consider whether ifc mi^fc ™t be advisable that be should be reinoved|to some other sphere, uqt by wqy of punishment, but to effect a separation between him and a class ot persons whose friendship and applause he evidently courts. . . . This action of Mr b raser s has been a very dirty business, and the more he stirs it up by writing in the rress the more unsavory the stench.” .1 Fraser to hi s affidavit ’stated—ihat the matters set out in the three preceding paragraphs of this my affidavit contarn a most wicked and malignant libel on my characier and conduct in relation to my said office of Resident Magistrate, and to the discharge of the diAies appertaining to such office, and I verily believe that the same were written and published of me from corrupt motives and for the purpose of injuring me in my official capacity in the estimation of the public and the Government of this Colony, and for the further purpose of bringing a reproach upon the s»id Government m having such an officer as rpyself ip fhe position of Resident Magistrate as aforesaid, and ot raising grave and seriqus doubts of the justice administered by me as such Kefident'Magistrate.” * The rule was granted, and made returnable on 4th May.