HALL SKELTON CASE

Hokitika Guardian, 22 July 1926, Page 1

HALL SKELTON CASE

■BY TELEGRAPH—PRESS ASSN., COPYRIGHT. AUCKLAND, July 21. A meeting was held in Auckland last night, and it cautiscally criticised the recent libel case in which Air Hall Skelton figured (where Judge Stringer and a special jury heard his unsuccessful claim for damages against Henry H. Soabrook and Thomas Farrell, printers, for alleged libel during last year’s election campaign, a circular issued by the Protestant Political

Association signed by Seabrook, as

president of the Roskill group, in which district Potter and Skelton were Parlaimentary candidates, having spoken of Skelton as having “ manifested sympathy with the enemies of the Empire, who wished to secure its overthrow,” while a second cause of action was alleged matter in the “New Zealand Sentinel,” which plaintiff claimed set him out as being disloyal, and as a representative of persons who" held murder a sacred duty). Strong exception was taken by the meeting to the attitude of the Court throughout. The appointment of a Special Jury, after two definite fixtures before a Common Jury had been made, was severely commented upon. One speaker said : When the late Mr •Massey took an action for libel, bo applied for a Special ,lury, and lie was refused one. as Special Juries were only granted where expert knowledge was required. Why was this exception made?

A strong committee was appointed to carry out the objects of the resolutions that were carried. Resolutions ns follows were carried : (1) That this meeting presents its sympathy to Air and Mrs Hall Skelton and family in what they believe to be a grave miscarriage of justice inflicted on them in the recent libel action, Hall Skelton v. Seabrook, and pledges itself to find from a National Fund to be collected, all the costs in connection with the case, and, later, to present a cheque from New Zealand sympathisers to in ark their disapproval of what is common belief among .widespread public opinion that the case in question was a travesty of justice. (2) That this meeting will represent to Parliament, urgently, that legisla., tion be introduced preventing any judge in future from granting a special jury in any libel action, it being contrary to the spirit and principles of law; as the jury in this case, had no Liberal, no Labour, and nor Irishman thereon, and, as such, it was not right that they should have been asked to judge where a strong political opponent was litigating. After plans for conducting the campaign were concluded, over £SO was subscribed in a- few minutes to start off. It was announced that one sympathiser had already sent Air Hall Skelton a direct cheque for 25 guineas, and that others have followed suit.