Supreme Court.

Hawke's Bay Times, Issue 1535, 19 December 1873, Page 54

Supreme Court.

SATURDAY, 13t H DECEMBER. Libel, Alexander Kennedy, Thomas Kennedy Newton, George Edmund Lee, Edward William Kuowles, Edward Henderson Grigg, and Robert Price were charged that they did unlawfully and maliciously write and publish, and cause and procure to be written and published "in the Daily Telegraph newspaper of the 25th November, a certain false and scandalous, and defamatory libel of, and concerning one Henry Bowman Sealy, in his capacity of Commissioner of Crown Lands. In this case three of the defendants had pleaded not guilty on the general issue, and had also put in a plea of justification. The other three had not pleaded. His Honor said that Mr Wilson surely did not suggest that all the defendants could be tried together—-that those who had not pleaded justification, should have the benefit of the plea put in by the others. Mr Wilson did not see how the difficulty was to bo avoided. His Honor said there was one way in which the difficulty could be avoided—by trying the defendants separately. If this was a libel published by the procurement of the defendants, and a number of them did not plead justification, in the case of the matter being shown to be libe'hus, those who had not pleaded justification must be found guilty, though the others were justified. This might popularly be considered almurd ; but it would be the fault of those defendants who had neglected to take the proper means to defend themselves. The defendants must distinctly understand that if they did not urge the plea of justification on their own behalf, they could take no advantage of the pleas of others. They would have an opportunity of considering aud joining in the plea. Mr Cornford announced that he appeared for the three other defendants, who had all decided to join in the plea. He now represented all except Mr L -e. Mr Lee appeared on his own behalf, and joined in the plea of justification. His Honor said ho was glad that all the defendants had joined in the plea. What a scandal it would have been in the eyes of an undiseerning public, unable to understand the reason, if, as might be the case, three of these defendants had been acquitted on the plea of justification, and the other three, for exactly the sanio offence, had been deprived of the benefit of the plea, and punished. He had thought it proper to bring this forwardat once, uot to have it come up as a surprise during the progress of the case. Mr Wilson joined issue by filing the replication, aud the case was called on. Mr Cornford moved that the indictment be quashed, It was bad on the face of it. (The learned gentleman proceeded to state his objection, which was of a technical character.) His Honor: But you have pleaded. Mr Cornford : No, your Honor. His Honor: And your plea has been amended.

Mr Oornford : A motion to quash an indictment can be made at any time before the jury are sworn. His Honor : You cannot make an application of this kind on a matter of mere form at this sta<;e of the case. Mr Oornford read a portion of the indictment setting forth that the libel was with intent to injure Mr Sealy in his office of Commissioner. The indictment was bad, as it failed to show that Mr Sealy was the occupant of the office at the time. His Honor: It does not affect the libel, even though be had ceased to occupy the office. If: it should turn out that he was not the Commissioner to which the libel alluded, the prosecution would have tailed in their proof. Your objection is con elusive]}' disposed of by the necessity for the prosecution to prove their inuendo. At the same time, it it) a very proper point for you to take. The following special jury was then empaneled -.—Thomas Tanner (foreman), Robert Stuart, John James Torre, J. H. Vautier, H. C Robjohns, W. R. Russell, R. P. Williams, Gavin Peacock, Thomas F. Poole, George Honeywood Noras, H. B, Holder.

Mr Wilson opened the caso for the prosecution. The defendants were charged with puMish ng a false, scandalous, and malicious libel. The whole article containing the libel would have to ho read sooner or later, and it would save time to read it now.

His Honor said that it would save time if he numbered the parts of the article specified in the indictment as libels. He accordingly numbered them 1 to 7. Mr Wilson proceeded : The prosecution was instituted by Mr Sealy, who for some yean past bad held the office of Com-

missioner of Crown Lands in this province; and the defendants were respectively the proprietors, publishers, and editor of the Daily Telegraph newspaper. These pro-, ceedings had not been brought on an isolated libel ; but the article on which the information- was based was the last of a series of attacks on the p-osecutor, commenced in that paper in May last. (Mr Wilson here read the whole article to the jury.). He would now point out the parts specified as libels in the' indictment, together witli the inuendo, or construction placed upon each by the prosecution. 1. " We allude to the Land Office, and to the mismanagement, or, perhaps, nore correctly speaking, the misuse or abuse of his powers and privileges by the Crown Lands Commissioner." 2. " The Crown Lands Office has been worked, or as in America it would be termed, ' rigged,' for the exclusive benefit of ihe sheep-farmers, to the injury of the Province and of the Colony "—-" meaning thereby," the indictment preceded, to explain, "that the business of the said Crown Lands Office had been conducted by the said Henry Bowman Realy in a trn-kv and fraudulent manner." 3. " Owing to the bad character tin- office Ikir so long enjoyed," &e. _ 4. " Wh-th'-r the Land Commissioner himself gives the r quired information to the sheep-fiu'iner, we. know not; hut uis us extraordinary as it is disgraceful that the transactions in the Land Office are at once made known, to the prejudice of intending settlers." 5. "The agent of Messrs. Aynsley and Rhodes was with the Commissioner when the application was tendered for signature; but we maintain that without that officer's connivance the application could not have been read by the agent." 6. '• In the meantime, however, the Province is being seriously injured ; while the rest of the Colony is making every effort to induce settlement, Hawko's Bay, through its Land Commissioner, is doing its best to drive settlers from the place." "7. " We trust the whole circumstances will bo placed before the General Government, who, taking tho injury being done the Province into consideration, will see their way to placing some one in the office of the Crown Lands Commissioner who will be better able to conduct the business of the department with justice to the Colony." Ho put the whole article before them as an unjustifiable attack. The most important plea in defence was that of justification, which, however only applied to some of the libels he had read to them. No attempt was made, for instance, to justify i'he slang word " rigging " —• an American expression, of modern origin. His Honor said that " rig " in the sense in which it was there used was an English word,well-known and understood.

Mr Wilson did not believe the word was thirty years old. It did not appeal- in Johnson's dictionary. His Honor : It was a good old English word before either you of I were born. Mr Wilson. It may not be in Johnson ; but is far better understood than many words in his collection. Even if it were as modern as you say, it does not take thirty years to adopt a new word into the language. But it is not new—did you uevor hear of " thimble-rigging.'" Mr Wilson : Not in very reputable company, your Honor. At any rate, the jury will find no difficulty in putting the interpretation of fraudulent dealing upon it. As I shall have an opportunity of addressing you again, gentlemen, I shall now only read a few extracts from issues of the same paper antecedent to the libellous article now before the Court. I shall take first the issue of the Bth May last. Mr Cornford objected. Anything written subsequently might be available to show animus; but not matters long antecedent.

His Honor said that if an article written long before were taken, and no intermediate links shown, the objection would lie a good one : but it would be quite competent for Mr Wilson to show if lie could that the libel was the culmination of a seriee of attacks.

Mr Wilson said he could go eighteen months back, if necessary. Surely May was late enough, especially when he could show others between.

Mr Corn ford : You cannot go hack beyond the time during which all (lie present defendants were concerned in the paper. Mr Wilson said that only one oi' the present defendants was note mieotcd with the paper at the time. It was not easy to follow the continual changes of publishers in the case of papers of this description. Mr Cor jford's objection was bad. In cases of conspiracy, how could a conviction, bo obtained if his rule was carried out ? His Honor agreed with Mr Wilson on I his point, and that gentleman proceeded to read extracts from the Daily Telegraph of Bth May, 10th May, Ist August, and loth September, lie also read from the issue of the 25th November, a partial retractation, in which the term *' connivance" was admitted to have been improperly used ; but the other allegations contained in the former article were reiterated. Had that been a real apology, or anything like a proper spirit been shown by the defendants, the present prosecution would not have been instituted.

Duncan Guy sworn, deposed : I am the Registrar of the Supremo Court. I produce the affidavit of registration of the Daily Telegraph newspaper. (Affidavit read by witness.) I produce the paper returned with the depositions. It is headed " The Daily Telegraph." The imprint corresponds with the affidavit, and gives name of Edward G-rigg, as printer and publisher for the proprietors. Mr Cornf ord consented to take the article as read.

William Parker, sworn, deposed : I am a clerk in the Crown Lands Office, Napier. I am over 20 years of age. I know the paper produced. I purchased it on the 28th N«vomb»r, at the Daily Telegraph office, from the defendant Robert Price. I asked him for copies of the Daily Telegraph of the 2-ith, 25th, and 26th November. Ho looked for them, and handed them to me through the window, and I paid him. Ho said as he handed then? to ine "These will be ample for Mr Sealy to work up Ins ease." I had not mentioned Mr Sealy's name to him. By Mr Oornford ; I have beeu clerk in the Crown Lands Office over two years I received instructions to act in that capacity from Mr Ormond, General Government agent. I had previously been assistant in the Resident Magistrate's Court. I was never appointed in any other way to my present position. I was appointed clerk in the Resident Magistrate's Office, in August, 1869. I am not certain whether I worked in the Crown Lands Office before I received any instructions from Mr Ormond. I went into the Crown Lands Office at the same time as Mr Sealy, and at once commenced duties. I fulfil the ordinary duties of a clerk, and deliver Crown Grants. When Mr Sealy is absent on public business, I receive applications, keep each accounts, &c. I receive £125 per annum salary. Money passes through my hands. I refuse applications if I am perfectly certain that Mr Sealy would refuse them. By the Coprt: I have no special instrue*

tions as to receiving or rerusingapplications in Mr Sealy's absence. Mr Sealy is sometimes absent in the discharge of his duties as Resident Magistrate as well as Commissioner. 110 is not often absent during the whole day. He lias to go to Waipawa every second month, when he is absent three days, and to Haveloek every month •for one day. He is Resident Magistrate in Napier. The Court days for civil cases are Tuesday and Friday, and he attends when sent for on other days in criminal cases. The Commissioner's office is distant about 50 yards from the Resident Magistrate's Court-bouse. ! The Commissioner's office is open from 9.30 a.m. to •i.oO p.m. every day except Saturday. 1 retain my appointment as clerk of the Resident Magistrate's office, and if there is a press of work it is brought to me. By Mr Coruford : When Mr Sealy is sitting as Resident Magistrate, I do not refer to him before accepting or rejecting applications. I always refer to Mr Weber, the Chief Provincial Surveyor, or Mr Jarman, the draughtsman. After consulting these gentlemen I accept or reject the applications, always subject to Mr Sealy's authority afterwards. . His Honor said he could not understand how, if theapplicatioiis were once accepted at the office, they could be altetv-d afterwards.

Cross-examination continued : I have never known any case in which Mr Kealy has rejected any application accepted by mo. The building in which the office is situated has no general name. I have heard the whole building called the Laud Office, though it includes also the Survey Office, the Receiver of Laud Revenue's Office, and the Provincial Treasury. The same gentlemen is Treasurer and Receiver.

Mr Wilson : And Sheriff as well. Witness continued ; There are about six gentlemen connected with the Land and Survey offices. In the case of an application for rural land, the applicant goes into the Survey Office, has the necessary plan produced, describes the laud ho wishes to apply for, and the draughtsman usually fills in the application, which the applicant then presents at the Crown Lands Office, for the authority of the Commissioner of Crown Lauds to tho Receiver of Laud Revenue to receive the amount payable If the application is allowed by the Commissioner, it is registered in the application hook, and that completes the form. The applicant, I belie/e, gels a receipt from the Receiver, and has to come back at a later period to the Crown Lands Office for the Grant when it is ready. It is notified in the Gazette when the Grants arc ready for issue, and the grantee also receives notice. At present Crown Grants are not issued from our office, but the grantee goes to the Land Transfer Office and registers there. The applications arc entered in the book as received. They aro usually made towards the close of office hours, and in that case aic recorded next morning. If the book is not entered up, any one applying to see the application book is allowed to see the original applications. I have never allowed any one to see an application before the receivcordei to the Receiver of Land Revenue has been granted. I know of no case in which anythng of the kind has occurred ; but if two persons were together at the counter I should think one person might be allowed to see the otherV. application, though it was not completed. 1 never knew it done. If applications aro made by different applicants on the same day for the same land, they are registered as simultaneous. The Commissioner declares them to be simultaneous. I. have also done so.

His Honor; If a person should go no promptly to the Land Transfer Office as to obtain his certificate the same day, what would be dono in the case of another application for the same land made on that day ?—I cannot say; T never knew the business to be transacted in so rapid a manner.

Cross-examination continued: Simultaneous applications are not common. In the last twelve months there may have been three or four. In cases where an application has been covered by another, I have never known the first to be withdrawn. The land is then put up, and the bidding is between the applicants only. In tiie Crown Lands Office we go by the Commissioner's watch, and it' he is not there, by mine, if I have it. New Zealand mean time is the standard. I regulate ufy watch by the telegraph clock ; whether Mr Sealy does so or not, I cannot say. I open and close the office. Applications are received during the whole of the office hours. I am exact about the time. I compare my watch about twice a week with the telegraph clock, when I carry it. There is a clock in the Survey Office which is gone by when I have not my watch. I have known it stopped for several days. I have carried my watch regularly for the last two months—it had a year's spell previously. (His Honor remarked that a young - gentleman could not be expected to keep a chronometer on £l2O a year.) When the clock was stopped we went by the watches of the other officers. My watch was a present; it is a Geneva watch, quite good enough for office purposes. 1 have it on me, but will not oblige you by producing it unless I am bound to do so. (At his Honor's request, the witness showed it to Mr Corn lord.) From the Ist November there luis been a change in the office hours; they used to be from 10 o'clock to L- Applications are usually made near the closing hour, I should imagine to avoid a simultaneous application being made. I never gave a receipt order after closing hours, nor am I. aware that such a thing has ever taken place. On Saturday, the 22nd November, I remember Mr Hcyland coming to the office. I do not remember at what time he came. He was there at half-past 1.2. He put in an application to purchase 2000 acres of rural laud in the Patoka district. I handed that application to the Commissioner. (Mr Cornford called for the application, which was produced, and marked A.) We do not make any memorandum of the hour at which an application is put in. I handed it to the Commissioner, who Was sitting at the same table as myself, at the opposite corner. There is a counter in the office, also a desk and table. The applicant comes to the counter; the office is; an open one. The table is behind the counter? the public come to the counter. The other part of the office is quite open. The table is i feet 9-]- inches from the counter. The counter is about 2 feet 9 inches wide. There is a door at the end of the counter. Mr Sealy's private office is beyond that door. A receivc-order was made out for the application, in the usual way. perhaps six or seven minutes from the time of application. That is about the usual time. If two were to come in together, and I were alone, I would finish with the first before I attended to the second ; but applications do not come in bo rapidly. It was after half-past 12 when the order was given, and Mr Heyland left the office. Mr Kinross was in the office at the time, standing at the table. Ho was on public business with the Commissioner. He was perusing a document in a ease in which Mr Sealy was interested as Commissioner of Qrowu Land* :

His Honor said ho could not understand how this could be described as public business. , -Witness continued : Mr Kiuross is interested in the case. Russell v. Scaly, I believe, is the title of the case. T do not know how long Kinross was in the office ; I cannot say whether he was there when Heykind left. When Heyland's application was handed in, I put it before Mr Sealy. Kinross was then standing at the table, and could quite easily see what it was. After Mr Kinross left, Mr Wilson came in. He did not go into the private part of the room. He asked to see the application book, Heyland had then gone. It was about 17 minutes to 1 o'clock wheu Wilson came in—l am sure of the time. When ho entered the office I was in the act of entering the application. I had written enough to show the nature of the application. As the entry was not complete, he asked to see the application itself. I let him see it, and he put in a simultaneous application for the same land, on behalf of Rhodes and Co., a firm in Christchurch, the occupiers, I believe, of the run on which the application was made. Wilson's application was taken, and a receive-order granted by the Commissioner. I cannot state at what time that order was given within five minutes; I am quite sure it was given before ! o'clock. 1 looked at my watch when Mr Wilson came in, and did not look at tho time when the order was given. I know the proceedings did not take seventeen minutes—l do not think they occupied more than soven. It is not frequent for people to be behind tho counter. I cannot remember any person but Mr Kinross being there ; Wilson may have been ; I do not think Mr Kinross has been there more than two or three times. In addition to the receipt of applications, Crown Grants arc prepared and delivered in the office.

By Mr Lee : The document produced is not the usual form of receive order, it is in my handwriting. It is a special form of order. It took mo longer to fill it up than an ordinary form would have taken —one-half longer, at any rate. I remember a simultaneous application made by Kiuross and Russell on the 7th of April last. When an application is made for land a plan is attached when it is so stated in the form. There are two plaus attached to the documents produced. Each has two plans attached, and there is one plan loose, which belongs to both. (Tho separate plan was here marked E). Tho plan E was not put in with the applications, but sent next day by Mr Weber. After the applications were signed by Kinross they were in the custody of tho Crown Lands Office. On the Bth of April they were taken into the Survey Office by Mr Jarman. I do not know whether he asked for then), or whether I gave them—he knew where to iind them. I was in charge at the time, Mr Sealy being absent. I do not know what Jarman did with them, Fresh plans wero attached, whether witli the consent of Mr Kiuross or not, 1 do not know. Mr Russell made au application on Saturday, the nth April, for the same laud for which they applied on the 7th. Mr Russell's application (marked ¥.) included the whole of the two applications 0. and D.: Mr Russell's application was received, and an order given. A fresh order was given on Monday, because the Receiver informed the Commissioner that the money had not been paid on Mr Russell's application. I am not awaro that Mr Russell's consent was obtained tc tho alteration of the plans on Mr Kiuross'a application. There was no plan or tracing on Mr Russell's application—no reference being made to any ; tho application simply including the whole of the Crown Laud unsold on the run. The original tracinga remain on tho applications. The tracings on C. and D. are only a part of the original: but are the greater parts. Ido not know what has become of tho remaining part of the tracings. I know the document marked G. The foot-note is in my handwriting, and reads as follows: " i'he application cannot be received, as the lots were sold by auction in June, 1861, more than three years ago." They havo not been put up to auction since 1861. Simultaneous applications have occasionally bi;en made for land on sheep-runs. In such cases, the runholder is generally one of the applicants. The runholder is Sometimes the first of the two applicants, sometimes the second. I havo known inslances of both ways. In the sitnullaneous applications made on the run of A. Chapman and W. Rhodes, the runholders were first. Mr John Buchanan was the other applicant. Ido not remember any other case of the kind. His Honor said that, prima facie, he did not see why, in every case, the runholder should not bo allowed the first chance. The system appeared to be a remarkably defective one. So far as he could see there was no reason for secrecy. He did not know why applications for land should not be as'public as transactions in the market-place. Re-examined by Mr Lascelles : Mr Kinross's business within the counter on the occision of Heyland's application had reference to the lawsuit in which Mr Russell was plaintiff, and Mr Sealy defendant. Mr Kinross was .interested in that case, and was looking over a plea in the suit. When Mr Wilson has been there, he would be there on public business. I have never known Lim come behind iny counter, except as Provincial Solicitor, mostly on Crown Lands business, or Resident Magistrate's business. Mr Wilson is solicitor also for many of the runholders in the Province. No fee is charged for examining the application-book. Heylaud could see Kinross when he came in, and hear what was said. Part of the application deposited by Heyland could be read from the counter. I have never given any runholder or other person information, except what they were properly entitled to claim. There are general instructions prohibiting civil servants from divulging what takes place in their offices. These instructions have always been obeyed by me, and, so far as 1 am aware, followed by the Commissioner. 1 am not aware of any irregular transaction in connection with bJB office.

Henry Bowman Scaly, sworn, deposed ; I am Commissioner oi : Crown Lands for the Province of fiawke's Bay, having'received my appointment to that office in March, .1.871. I was appointed by his Excellency the governor, under the Acj; pf 18(j?,, There is no other Laud Commissioner in this district. To the best of my ability, and in good faith, I have carried out the duties of my office fairly and impartially, and have not, in any way, abused or misused my powers and privileges. I have never thrown obstacles in the way of applicants; I have never voluntarily given them notice of any application of which they would not otherwise have known. I remember Mr Heyland making au application. He came into the office, and my clerk" Parker, called my attcntiou to the fact of an application having been brought in. I was sitting at the tithe at the table, in company with Mr Kinross, examining some law papers, and writing a telegram to my solicitors in Wellington. The papers related to a suit instituted by Mi" H. B. KusseU against m©

as Crown Lauds Commissioner, in reference to a dispute in which Russell and Kinross were rival applicants. 1 told Parker to prepare a reccivc-ordcr. I did not look afc my watch, but think it was about half-past 12. Parker made out llic order, and laid it before me with the application. I signed the order, and tleyland took it away. Mr Kinross loft the oflico almost immediately after, his business with me being completed. Ido not think Heyland's business occupied, more than seven minutes. After Mr Kinross left, I took my telegram to the Telegraph Office.' On my way I saw Mr Wilson, going to tho Land Office, and he culled to know how soon I would be back. .After leaving the telegram, I went back to my office, and got there about a quarter to one. I found Wilson making an applica--1 ion for the same land that Heyland had applied for, and said to him, " You have smelt out that matter pretty soon." I then completed tho application, and gave the order. I am sure it was before 1 o'clock when the order was given. I looked ot my watcb. I took no steps to enable Mr Wilson to make the application, ami was rather surprised ; I certainly did not connive at it. I havo a clerk named Parker. He has never, to my knowledge,sanctioued any irregularities, or given to any information which ho should not have done. In my absence it was Parker's duty to receive applications. For unsurveyed lands, no application can be cons'dered as final. I did not retain a right to repudiate an acceptance by Parker in my absence which I should not have accepted had I been {(resent. Mr Wilson : I will maintain that tho Comm ssiouer has no power to delegate his duties. His Honor: In which case the whole transaction would be illegal.

Mr Wilson : The Commissioner is bound to leave a person in charge to receive applications, whose duty it would be to number them according to priority ; but he cannot delegate his power to rcceivo applications, in tho sense of being responsible. His Honor: What you are contending for now is what it is scarcely your part to prove—that the. business has been conducted iu an irregular manner. Witness: There is no clock iu the office. Wo go by the telegraph clock—the only standard available. His Honor : Is it correct ? Mr Wilson : In the morning it starts well, your Honor, but falls off during the day. His 'Honor: I sec you arc not much better off in this respect than you were years ago, when it was impossible to obtain the correct time in Napier.

Witness continued: I remember Mr Russell's application. He came into the office in company with Mr Brandon. I wss in my private offics; he called me out and gave mo his application. It was then, I believe, from live to seven minutes short of '}. o'clock, the closing hour. I gave him the reccivc-ordcr about soven minutes past two. .1 had received two applications ju6t previously, for other land, and was occupied on them when he came, I received his application directly ho brought it. I finished the three orders iu turn, as I received them. I interposed no delay, but made all possible haste. He would be too late to pay the money that day. The next day, Sunday, early. I received a note from Mr Kinross, which I returned immediately. It was, iu fact, to ask what part of the Motuotaraia land was included in Mr Russell's application, Mr Kinross was in tho office together with Mr Russell when tho application was made ; he had made the two previous applications. I turned down the corner and wrote, as near as I can remember—" All Joo Tanner's run at 10s." I had not informed Kinross that Russell had made the application. I was iu my office a good part of next day, and received an application from Kinross for the same land. On the Bth April, I was absent at VVaipawa where I had gone to hold a Court. I returned on the 9th or 10th. When I came back I hoard of a complaint that some tracings had been altered ; I fancy Parker gave mo tho first information ; 1 heard of i|: immediately on my return. Mr Orinond, as Superintendent, had held an inquiry in the Survey Office, and had had the tracings replaced—this was what I was told. Parker has correctly given an outline of the process followed by applicant*. All I know of the interference with the plans is from hearsay. They were taken from my office by the draughtsman. The Provincial officers have a right to take the applications out of the office, as they mark all these things on the As a general rule, this is done. What is done iu the Survey Office is beyond my immediate control. I recollect an application for rural laud at Waipukurau, by Mr Tollemache, as agent for Mr John Harding. Tollemache applied for laud to be put up at auction as 'ss land, and the application was granted. I have no recollection of an application for that laud at 10s. I have no recollection of saying that tho land had been put up to auction three years before. I certainly did not say so officially; I may have mentioned it in conversation. I remember an application by Mr Kinross, on a Monday—the one to which these tracings relate. In the one case the land was applied for to be put up | at auction, which I allowed ; in the other | case the land had been put up to auction j i,jaiiy years before, audi allowed it to he j sold with other land at lQs. I remember j going to inspect Rhodes and Chapman's run on the f 4ith April, to certify the 5s land, and to indicate the 10s land. I yaw Mr F. J. Tift'en. He said he was Buchauan's agout, and wished to buy any j land which I might certify as 10s land, on both Buchanan's aud Chapman's applications. Under the Act the applicants apply for land to be put up at ss, and tho Commissioner has to certify whether it is 5s or 10s land-; if it is not 5s land it is j not put up to auction. I told him I could not recognize Ins right to any information j as to Chapman's application. lie said i something about claiming to buy it, aud I asked when T should boatmyollj.ee. I ! sajid I expected to be in town on Saturday, j l;ut I did not expect to be iu before 2 p.ip. I was iu town on Friday, but not at toy office ; X was ill; and if 1 was in tho office on Saturday, I was only there for a minute. { went on Mouday to the office, to seo Mr Tilfcp. An application i had been made by Rhodes and Chapman, ion jL'? e 25th Aprij, for gOQ acres,of"lDs land.' I ,djd »o|; 'tell F. J. Tiffed that ilonday, the 28th, would ho early enough for him to apply- I told Mr Tii&n that if he came on Monday I would show him the result of my inspection on behalf of Buchanan. Ou the 3rd October, I received an application by Charles Nairn for 25,460 acres of the Pourerero run. I remember that land being gazetted for sale. The land was surveyed by contract. When it came on for sale, I suggested that the blocks were laid out in a very unsuitable' shape, and objected to it tp Mr Weber, as I thought it very unsuitable to go to auction.'" MrWeber'thought it suitable ; 1 referred the matter to Mr Ormond, audit was altered. It was a matter of opinion.' The. alteration made, the survey m near the regulations as the nutnrtl fcfc

j turcs of the country would permit. J. am ; not prepared to say that tho original survey was illegal,-but it certainly strained J the regulations to the utmost. j By Mr Cornford : Ido not remember I signing the memorandum I put on Kinross's note ; 1 may have initialled it. [ certainly gave information in that note. I consider that there is no impropriety in giving information out of office hours | which can be demanded at the office. j Mr Cornford ; When is an application [ complete? His Honor: This is a question of law —tho whole question in the ponding action. It is scarcely a matter of fact to crossexamine Mr Scaly upon. Witness: I -look upon the application as a record as soon as it is. presented ; but it is not finally completed until the money is paid. The money might never be paid ; yet the application would remain as a record. His Honor: You cannot charge the witness with an abuse of his powers -n the interpretation of his duties, when the point in dispute is a fairly arguable question of law. Mr Cornford : You say you have no control over the Survey Office. Ou the 18th February Mr John Buchanan came to your office, and asked to see an application to purchase 4,000 acres on the run of Messrs. Chapman and Rhodes. That application referred to a tracing attached, and none was attached. You then, in the Survey Office, requested Mr Jaruian.to annex the plan? Witness: According to my recollection I the plan was attached when the applieai tion was made. His Honor: That is not inconsistent with his statement that he had no control over the department. Witness: I had no notice of this, and have no recollection of the circumstance. I have often asked the Survey Officers to do certain things, and they have generally complied. I remember meeting F. J. Tiffen in April last. I will swear I did not tell him that Monday would be time enough for him to put in a simultaneous application. I told him that on Monday I would tell him the result of Mr Buchanan's application. 1 told him I did not recognize his right to ask for any information about Chapman's application. 1 n the case of Nairn's application, whore the alteration was made, I believe the same plan was altered. I believe this plan produced was the one altered. I cannot say that representations had been made to me about the unfairness of the survey ; it struck nie as very indiscreet the first time I saw it. It is not my duty to examine a survey before the sale is gazetted, though T should not bo justified in selling if too land is not laid out according to tho regulations. It might be impolitic to put up the land in long strips, but it would not bo against the law, if they were rectangular. I do not recollect "Wilson going out on the 22nd November, while I was writing out the receive order, and coming in a second time. Ido not know that Wilson paid tho money before he got tho receive order : he got the order before one o'clock, and went in the direction,of the Treasurer. I did not see Heyland's application until the receive order was drawn out; I was excessively busy, and did not sec the application till my attention was drawn to it. Kinross stayed about a quarter-of-an-hour ; he has been two or three times behind thecounter—l see no wrong in that. Ido not make any concealment of the applications. The Surveyor can take the documents from the oflico. because he is a necessary Government officer to copy them on tho maps. It is pari, of his duly—he docs not need to consult rne. We could not carry ou the business of flic office without him.

By Mr Lee : J £ a surveyor took an application and destroyed it, 1 should know from the book that it was gone ; I should havo no other means of knowing than if my own clerk was to do such a tiling.. The plan is not a necessary part of the application ; it is rarely copied into the application hook. We never take receipts from the Survey department. We do not when the day's work is over, apply to the Survey office for our documents. The application and receipt are evidence of the contract between the Government and the purchaser. The applications would soon l»e missed if they were not returned from the Survey office. Old applications might be removed and not missed. Ay a general nil-, it takes about five minutes to examine I he application, write the order, and fill in the counterfoil—sometimes more, sometimes less. O.i the sth April, neither Kinross nor Henry Russell came into my oflico with th*'ir applications. They both stood at tlio counter together. Kinross brought two applications, a short time before Henry Russell came ; I was making out the first order for Kinross when he called me ; I made out the orders) and gave them out in rotation, When I gave .Russell his receive order, I did not know as a matter of fact that Tylee had gone. I knetv it was past 2 p.m. Russell was urging me to make haste in fact delaying me by his urgency. Brandon may have come in and told me that Tylee said he would not wait. On Sunday the 6th April I wrote a minute on a note from Kinross : I have not on reflection thought that Kinross madp his application on account of the information I had given : if I Had refused him. he would have been there by 10 a.m. on Monday. From the tenor of his note I. understood that Kinross knew in what part of the country the land was situated,' though not what particular pprtion. In his note he said his overseer, Alfred Price, was going up country, and he wanted to send word to Tanner, If Kinross had been in my private office, he could probably have seen Heylatid's application without his knowing : whereas Heyland could sechim where he was, In rofei'etiCO to Harding's case. I do not remember him ever applying for the land at 10s. per acre. The application was math) on the Bth March 187"!. \ cannot bdar : in'mind every detail; ' I don't think Mr Harding was present. I remember Tollemache putting in the application. I don't know why, if. Harding was there. I havo no recollection of any conversation of the kind set forth in tho plea. If he had asked mo to decide, I think I should have 'remembered ; it'w'aa contrary to my practice on a former occasion. I do not remember, his pointing out to me on the map tho' wo.rds " open fur selection," Larid put tip tor sale at -*>s and the deposit forfeited is open for selection after three years, at 10s*' by any applicant. At the time I came into office there was a practice that; vunholdera could apply to have their runs certified as 5s land after they had picked out the 10s. land. It was the practice to allow them to keep that land at ss. per acre without paying a deposit It was a disputed point whether this practice was in accordance \\jih the'Land regulations: butlhave upset that practice by a formal decisiou. Mr Buchanan was the fiast person who raised the point after I came into office. On the 18th April 1872, ho made a forme 1 protest, and on the 30th April I submitted hia ! pvpfiesMo the Qoveyomeatj with my own I

remarks. I received no answer from the Secretary of Orovvn Lauds, ah\J ou the 4th September I telegraphed to MrOnnondj to hurry the reply. On Mi' Onriond's return ho told me that- the mallei' bud been loft to my decision. I losi no time in deciding, and published ihe decision in the Gazette. When I went to inspect Mangakiiri, Buchanan was in Wellington.. I remember a protest by telegram about this sale. I remember Tiffen ■ reading something to

me; I thought it, was an official complaint, and took little notice of it. Field him 1 would let. him know on Monday what JOs land there was on Buehananss application : but not on Tiffen's. Buchanan's application did not include the whole of the land ; it was for the remainder. Chapman and Rhodes had applied to tho Commissioner on the Ist September 1862 to certify the remainder of tho run, and he refused ro do so till they bad bought all the 10s. land on the run. Tic sent a surveyor, who certified tho land, and they bought it. Chapman told me it would be a great grievance if I refused to certify. I told him that I would examine the land, and if he would pay the deposit, I would let him have all lie wished to apply for. The whole had been previously certified as os land, but I excepted 800 acres. Chapman came into town before nie, and applied for the 800 acr s. Parker took the application. The reason Chapman came was, 1 suppose, because he was present during my conversation with Tiffen. I went up specially to peint, out to him the portions I would not certify. The effect of my certificate is to stop the public buying, at 10s where they could previously do so. I rode over the ground with Chapman, and showed him. Mr Chapman had from me more

particular information than Mr Tifl'en as to what I would certify, and I thought he was entitled to it. Mr Tiffen could have applied for the land upon his own judgment. Mr Wilson would here close his case, after putting iu copies of the Uailv Telegraph of the Bth and 10th May, "the Ist Angnst' and tho 22nd, 25th, and 26th November, containing articles reflecting on the Crown Lands Office. Tho marked passages were read to tho jury by his Honor the Judge.

Mr Corn ford then opened his case. He said that the series of articles on the administration of Hie Grown Lauds Office wei"c very fair and just, and had been greatly misconstrued by the prosecution They were a succession of comments on the administration of the office, and were all included in the genera! plea of not guilt}'. The defendants hud undertaken to justify all they had published, except the term "rig," which, he maintained, would not bear the construction placed upon it by the prosecution. All the re: mainder they justilied, with the exception of the concluding paragraph, and surely there was no libel there. It was surely no libel upon the present Commissioner if they did not think him sufficiently wise and discreet for the office he occupied, io suggest that the Government should place a more suitable person in his position. He would now go through the twelve pleas of justification put in by the defendants. The first was, thai the business of the office was left sometimes for days together in the bauds of an inexperienced lad named William Parker, who exercised, during such times, all the authority of the Commissioner, without responsibility. The second was, that though by the regulations in force two applications in one day were considered simultaneous, yet no correct time was kept in the office. The third was, that the office had a bad character, in consequence of which applications were nearly always delayed till the last moment before closing, lest information should get abroad, and a simultaneous application be put in. The fourth was, that on Saturday, the sth April, an application put in by Mr H. K. Russell, was improperly delayed by the Commissioner until pastt the closing hour, thus preventing the deposit being paid to the Receiver before* the office opened on Monday. Fifth, that out of office hours, namely, on Sunday, the (3th April, the Commissioner improperly informed one J. G. Kimoss of the particulars of the application put in by Mr H. R, Russell. Sixth, that on Mr-Kinross putting in an application for the same land on Monday, the 7,1 h April, the Commissioner declared it to be a simultam.ous application with that which was put in by Mr H, R. Hussell on the previous Saturday. Seventh, t at on an application being presented ly one Rowley Alfred Heylaud, it was allo-vcd to be seen by Mr J. G. Kinross. Eighth, that the said J. G. Kinross had on several occasions been improperly admitted to a part of the office not open to the general public. Ninth, that on the Bth of April, the Commissioner improperly permitted the removal and alteration of certain tracings attached to applications. Tenth, that under precisely similar cases, the Commissioner had given decisions diametrically opposite in character. Eleventh, that at Maiigakuri, on Rhodes and Chapman's run, the Commissioner gave certain information to Mr Chapman, which he declined to give to Mr Tiffetj. Twelfth, that the Commissioner gazetted land for sale at PoureiVve, which, bad, not been properly surveyed according to the Land Regulations. Thirteenth, the general plea of justification—that the statements contained in the alleged libel were true, and published for the benefit of the public. In conclusion, Mr Go.vnfo.rd said that wdihuut impugning the right of free discussion—the most important principle of our constitution.,--the defeudality could not be found gu.jl.ty of libel. The Court at this point adjourned to 10 a.m, on Monday, the defendants being permitted to retire on their own recognizances,

[The length to which out' full extends, aud the arrival at y. b.le hour of English tclcgrurrw, .u-. compel us reluctantly to bold, over till Tuesday the conclusion of this important case. The result, as '.vc mentioned in our last, was a verdict of guilty, which was arrived at late ou Mouday night, aud the defendants were lined £5 each, with costs of the prosecution.]