THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1898, 24 March 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 1880.

The case of libel, “ Stead against the * Otago Daily Times ’ and ‘ Witness ’ Company (Limited),” lately heard in a preliminary way on the criminal side of the Christchurch Resident Magistrate’s Court, has created some sensation, and there can scarcely be any wonder that it did so. We do not, of course, refer to the subject matter of the prosecution, of the rights and causes—legal or otherwise —of the action. It is the singular, if not extraordinary, mode of procedure adopted by the Court on the occasion, which has given rise to comments unfavourable to the manner in which matters judicial are being administered by the gentleman who has presided for some few years past over the business of that Court. Human nature is always more or less weak and liable to err, and Judges and magistrates are but human. To hold the scales of Justice in a way such as to please everybody is a difficult thing, and allowances should bo made for shortcomings on the part of those who have accepted the ticklish task of dispensing so-called justice when it has to be greatly peppered with legal adjuncts. There is, however, a limit to this forbearance, and when public interests become seriously jeopardised by the erratic acts of a judicial officer, and the sense of right and wrong of a community is ruffled to an inordinate extent, it is time to see what remedy can bo applied to alter so unseemly a state of things. We believe that we are expressing a well-grounded public opinion when we say that judicial adjudications of Mr. Mellish, on the Christchurch Bench, have given general dissatisfaction for some considerable period past. Cases might be quoted to show that, whether it be among members of the Bar or the lay portion of the community, a feeling has grown for some time that Mr. Mellish is not suited, by either qualifications or temper, for the high post he occupies. We hoar of professional men who have of late declined to plead before him. The cases of the imitation-coin buttons, so strongly animadverted upon in the Assembly by the Hon. W. Fox, and that of the man Mr, Mellish dealt with summarily on a conviction for an indictable offence of a gross nature, are still remembered. But what shall be said of the proceedings in libel concluded last Monday in the criminal prosecution of the seven directors of the “ Otago Daily Times ” Company ? For reasons best known to the prosecution an information was laid against the directory of the company. Strictly legally speaking, whether the libel was a milk and water one or not, or whetlior the director a of the company were or were not absolutely ignorant of the publication of the alleged libel, an information for criminal libel could be laid, and could be accepted and acted upon by the Resident Magistrate. But the offence was “ sworn ” against the seven individuals in globo. Granting, for argument’s sake, that at the time the alleged libel saw publication, they were as innocent of its existence as the traditional man in the moon—and it is

justifiable to think so—some people might go so far as to think that excessive “ zeal ” was shown both by the prosecution, who laid the information, and the Magistrate who endorsed it. Criminal proceedings in libel are seldom followed now a days, except against persons who have published of their own knowledge and with malicious intent unwarrantable strictures upon their fellow creatures. But let this be as it may, in the case alluded to the information was filed by Mr. Mellish, and a criminal summons issued to the culprits, the directory of the “ Otago Daily Times” company, commanding the directory—seven in number as we said before—and by name, to appear and answer to the charge. The date fixed for the examination was last Saturday. When the time came and the names of the seven accused were called out, but one made his appearance. They are all men of good social, and let us say, political positions perhaps. Counsel for the defaulters begged Mr. Mellish to grant an “ adjournment” until the following Monday, pledging his word to the Court that the missing accused would then answer to the charge. To take the word of a solicitor in a situation of the kind may be said to be at the least peculiar. But the Resident Magistrate initiated the precedent and granted the adjournment, although the accused—the

directory in globo —not being there, the case could not be even opened. From one illegality to another there is but an easy step, and so it proved when the examination of the case was called on the adjourned Monday. Not only did the six units of the ‘‘ Daily Times ” directory fail to stand in the dock and redeem the word of their counsel, but one of them actually bearded the Court on its elevated platform by addressing to the Resident Magistrate a letter pregnant with defiant impertinence. It may not surprise many people that the Bench thought it not beneath its dignity to read this precious communication, and yet not resent the affront to the Court in any practical ; manner, when it is borne in mind that ; neither the facetious individual in ques.tion nor indeed any of the six units , were •ommon Toms, Dicks or Harrys. i Had they belonged to a humbler class, • the idea naturally suggests itself—if one ' looks at things judicial in Mr. Mellish’s | Court from the light reflected by the I past—that warrants of apprehension i would at once have been ordered, and the | wires set to work to ensure the vindica- { tion of the law. Nothing of the kind t took place, however. The Bench swallowed 1 indignity, contempt and all, and dismembering the directory of our 1 southern contemporary, it proceeded to c sit upon the one seventh of it who was j, there. This unfortunate director, the v only one who had bowed to the call of the law, was in due course “ sent up ” for trial. The “ balance ” of the accused are j now rejoicing. They laughed at the £ whole prosecution, insulted the court to their heart’s content, and doubtless they ” are still making merry over the easy way some gifted people are permitted to p

drive coaches and four—if they fortunately possess them—through the judicial paraphernalia of resident magistrates’ courts, conducted on patrician principles. No wonder, indeed, that some weakminded ones have been heard to bemoan of late, that in certain Temples of Justice, there is a judicial procedure for the rich and one for the poor. The outcome of this peculiar libel case, when it develops itself before the Supreme Court, will doubtless be watched with interest. We shall then have something more to say to it. In the meanwhile we trust that the attention of the Government may again bo drawn to the way in which things judicial are being conducted in the Christchurch Resident Magistrate’s Court under its present regime. Public opinion, always patient, demands, we believe, that a change should be made; and wo firmly believe that in this instance the profession is in accord with it.