THE JONES LIBEL CASE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5361, 3 June 1878, Page 3

THE JONES LIBEL CASE.

(From the Dunedin ilorninff 1/erald.}, ’ The purity of Parliament is a most commend, able virtue, and we look to Sir, George Grey to’ protect it with bis" Quixotic - shield. He haa already - darted his lance against " Pi akp ’Swamp transactions, and we would now fir?; pish Sir GeorgdVltb one of tbu minor iucidcijts arising put of the Piako, Swamp debates;., ilt will be remembered that the-House ;of'3vopfo* sentatives directed the prosecution of a bfr. Jones, ihc supposed proprietor or: editor of an Oamarn paper, for,alleged libel, in consejmence of the publication of an article, which reflected upon the conduct of ( the Hon, Mr., Whitaker in connectionwiththe. introduction of the Native [Lauds Act of last session. The whole House agreed that the attack upon Mr. i Whitaker .was ft very gross one, ancj, that while ayiyide latitude' bo allowed to , comments -upon public'men the article then under review transcended all reasonable limits.. The House, however, in a Very laudable endeavor, to prevent either Mr, - Whitaker or the accused from being unfairly /handicapped, 1 .resolved that tho ■ costs of;: the prosecution should fall upon the colony in the event'of Mr. Jonesbeing convicted/and in. the other alternative 1 of hia being acquitted that i the costs r 'of l defence should' also * be by the .colonial taxpayers. The reujaining alter.native not: provided for in concretion yitb th*

-anse- iu-thß-cvenlrof-'tEe' accused being; :,convict«d. This alternative ■baa not presented-itself;. and eyqn i£ it'had few jSerions would be |puhd tojsay that a odtfi victed libeller should be reimbursed at the ex- ■ peheo of fchepuhlidTfeasury. s It'iS’riotiiecessary for the purposes.of our: present aim that we should .commept upon the late, trial; ( y Wp may' b,t,pardoned,, however, for. .saying ‘.that the, whole thing'was a'gross blunder froid begin-' fling to end;' -i The ■ House -erred in'instituting' the prosecution ;• for .while it may have uatur- . aljy_ 'felt jiyacmyoyer, ,fhe; jreHcptiojUiOlqvelled against one of its members, it failed to remember that the outside portion ,of tho public did .not attach, ;so : inucU .importance to,the newspaper criticisms of an obscure s journal upon a very ojdfipfouistand traditionary wary politician. IBe Souse likewise;erred In'its fiyrffpaclujig efforts to discovor.au impartial tribunal whisn it 'selected,jDunedin- as . the place,iof trial, where necessarily,, all tlrci: land, scandals and small talk jof ,Piako .were, Greets oqr little, better, to even such a-apooial jury ap iigas erapannelled for the occasion, y And if tho. House erred, what; phall We say for the lawyej-3 ? jit' seems that Mr - . Jones, a resident of Qaujani, was, not content with the common legal'.fare of the Dunedin Supreme Court—with thoMacasseys or Stouts, the Smiths, Cooks,jHolmse,s„ Bartons or Dennistous, or Chapmans ,pr.Ste\vart», jvho or-* dinarily practise at thp here, j^Jlr-lKeos--^. better knojyn as, a voluble-apji yociferpus poIL; tician than a lawyer-T-must ,nocals ; ,.l}e‘ brought] from • Auckland or- - Hawke’s , Bay, to invent ;jayo ,pr three demurrable pleas,-merely in order ,to- find; some judicial wpric, for Mr. Justice Joliastpn and Bis “ brother Williams.” Mr. Rees certainly had, the, pleasure of, delivering subsequently what wq.presume, some critics term “a very hbleiand interesting,addrqss” to. the twelve, good men and, true, who were impaled in the -jury box. / We qnesjiion, however, ayhethpr a few liberal quotations from [“Valpy’s Delectus” would aof have-been equally appreciable., A few; chapters : from “B>r, Gilbert Leigh the;-appendix .upon :the great pyoconsul, or an,',jas ff»yjor<; :> editiou of VThe Ten Lost .Tribqs,of .Israel,"..would (probably have.' secured. Mr. Jones’ aequjttal as effectually as the “ very able and interesting address; of Mr. Bees.” However, the jury,had to listen !to the address, ■ and it is only, right'the; colony shouldpayrfor.it.. ~i. The costs and charges'of -the prosecution conducted- by Mr. Haggitt, the Crown Prose, outor, will he, wo believe, considerably under £'2oo. Thq costs-of the defence, according to,, the bill recently delivered, amount;;to the tolerably respectable total of Xbll f l js. The bill-is about to undergo the ta«.atiou of a Gq-j vernment officer—the Registrar at Dunedin 1 — and we feel persuaded that' he will acquit him-, self properly in the emergency. We commenced with this subject of Parliamentary purity, aud-we, .shall; conclude with-it. The hill of coats for £2117 14s. is rendered by a Mr. J. A- Hislop, a .name -familiar to the muster: roll of the House, of Representatives. This gentleman happens, however, to. be the town, agent of Messrs. Hislop and Creagh, solicitors,; Oamarn, and. it. appears "by the; bil( of costs that'he has “paid” the trifiing sum of £1709 •10S.J Mr;,,Hislop,, q£ tire. Oamarn establish-.! merit is a member ,of the -House, and his .name.is.,therefore‘hot merely familiar to its muster-roll. The bill of costa of Messrs. Hislop and Creagh isreally'a very, interesting 1 document, and rye feel sure it will yet make: its appearance in the parliamentary blue books. - But as some of our. readers may not-, wish to’wait until after the, close of next session of; Parliament. to - have their eager and, whetted appetites gratified,, we will furnish them withba few choice items, front the bill; referred to':— , . ■

Many other items equ'aliy outrageon's in the way of /perquisites ‘claimed by Mr.; Rees and , iHlstop ‘may' be culled- from the bill of costs, but -wc-select these as meat likely to rivet attention. Here wo have -two members of the ■ House, Iwhila declaiming iiir their places in the Assembly against the nepotism of a former Government in connection with the Rialto Swimpj Remanding their thousands of founds as leading' aM jdnior ‘counsel in connection with a purely-political trial. : Does one in, all Dunedin suppose that 5 Mr. -Hislop would‘ i•‘brought; 5 ‘from ’ Oamaru in an ordinary case'under a fee ‘engagement: of £270, or ’ two>i hundfed* and ‘ seventy shillings; or with the prospect of “ refreshing ” ■ ‘himself, at, a. further cdat 'pf iei37'los. Mr. Rees may be an excellent author, or admirable lecturer on the lost tribes of Israel;;; but in all conscience -we venture to -think - when’ Dunedin numbers its- - thirty or forty practitioners, it seems puzzling ’ that au Oamayu resident should have : to ■go to ‘Auckland 'or> Hawke’s Bay for the means of defence. We 5 shall probably publish the bills df-coats in extenso one of, these daysj and when they see; the light of day it 1 will'be discovered that Messrs Rees and Hislop claim something more , substantial! ;than’ the 1 fees and refreshers already quoted. We : _ do hoR for an-instant implicate Sir George'Grey; or his Government in the ‘ action 5 of the political ■ henchmen Messrs Rees and Hislop; ‘but we trust ,we havd said enough to induce some member of the Legislature to move at is next session that a copy of ; the bills of-costs shall be laid upom the. tables of both Houses. • If the sums demanded are anything like legitimate, nobody will quarrel with them. Upon the other’ hand, ; shbuld it i be'• considered‘‘that Messrs. Rees and Hislop have been seeking to take advantage of their relations with the Go-; vernmeut, a'similar sentence will probably be passed upon them to, that which fell to the lot of the, unfortunate Mr. Lusk. It, may seem strange,; hut after all it; is oply In accordance witbhumaii nqturc,* that while representative men will follow a leader upon a broad question of public policy, they will none the lesp exercise their own individual judgments upon any; matter appealing to a personal; sense; of honor-; ... ~, .> i ’

Paid Mr. iteos ■ i.. 0 0 Paid Mr. ilees's refresher S! i\ 0 0 Paid Mr. Hislop \ . ‘270 0 0 Refresher to Mr. Hislop .. .. m 10 0