MR. MOKAU JONES IN REPLY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 114, 30 May 1901, Page 2

MR. MOKAU JONES IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l have to-day io-eived a Tarariaki paper of March 2nd last, which contains a copy of a letter from Mr. Travr-rs to the Willing:on Evening Post upon the subject of the proceedi'ngs taken by ma in London b fore the nenrpnrated Law Society to hav.i the conduct of bi.s fiiaiid, Mr. Wiqkhira Flower, solicitor, in re ; p'>et to his deaU Jngs with the Mokau lan Is and myself inve-itigat..''!. Mr. Travars states that fclie Oommittea of the Ljw Society completely exi uprated Mr. Flower "fiom the grossly unprofess'o al conduc' amounting in fno* to fraud " clnrged against' him by Mr. Joshua Joqop, That is so, but it dues not terminate the case. Will you be good enough to publish the following pnKwdings that recently took place in the High Court, London : King's Bench, Divisional Court, Jus'tices Ohannell and Phillimor?. 1 . April 22nd and 23rd, 1901. |ln»-e a Solicitor ex parte J cshua Jon<s. 1 This case was by form of appoil from the finding and ri-poit of the Committer, of the Incorporated Law Society re. the.Solicitor, Mr, L'wson Walton, K C., M P., and Mr. Norman Craig appear d for the appellant, and Mr. J, G. Wood for the Solicitor. Upon the hearing of counsel oi both tides, it w»8 ordered:—" Thtit the fitiding of the Committee do stand reversed, that Wickham Flower, a,. Solicit or, is by the Court adjudged guilty of profossiona' bnisconduct in the matter comp'ained of apd in respect to bis wi'h his client, Joshua Jones, and that he do pay to the complainant, Joshui ■JoWv his costs of the enquiry before ihe Committee and also the cos's of these pr codings." Mr. Travels states that the Law Society " consented," at the instince of Mr. Jones, to hoar this comp'aint against Mr Flower. Tnis is not corrct, thn fact being, ns wa-? admitted by the Committee, tlatj the Society was ordered by th<i MaMrr! (if ihe Roils, now tha Lord Chief Justice, to hold the enquiry that hid tomany yoais Ik en refused, when iequcs'od by mo to b'-hold. It. was a

contention in Court by tho ro-pmdentV eouLisel tint the Sxiety vvts comet ir. persistently r> fusing to hold the in quiry, but upon Mr. Lawioa Walton reminding his learned brother that the Chairman of the Soci. ty that did " persistently refuse " was uiw d ir-g twelve y.aps in gaol he dropped tint line ol contention. This had reference to Mr. Flower's friend, Mr. B t jamin Gre n Ltke, for many years president of .thu Society, who with a great number of other members of that valued institution is now in " King's lodgings." Mr. Tiaveri Btat'-s tbat the inquiry Listed nearly a inoath. Qoite true; and Mr. Ti avers should have added that the Committee took an additional ton we. k« to bring up tboir report tlat "1,00 completely" white-washed Mr. Flower, a mutter they could have dona in fiv« ini nte?, as easily aa a iragi.strn.ta dis-•'yiot-'ing a camplniat. I f ay they should li'iv-.s dons it in tire tnirju'e.J, because it i-.-is pa<eDt fronj the first t.o cvi-ry ono that there was r.o intea'ion by the CV.ru.iiittee in !h ir caino>a piws lo liiasict Mr. Flower. " Dog won't ear dog " if he. can help it. 1l«\ staled that " &h\ Jous* w.is ;\-sit-ted in t'hc case by th*j'p. orrieturs nf Traih, agaiuaS whom an .i.itian for l.bc-1 is new pending at the oiut of Mr. Flo a or," Tlii.i sta'trneii'., like many others made by Mr. Travorn and his friend, Mr. Flowor, is abaoluUly untrue as far as my having any as-is-1 tance from any connected with Truth is concerned, iite fact being that the

funds (which Mr. Flower is now ordered to repay) vrera provided under directions of the Master of the Rolls by t.ho Liw H'ci ty from the annual grant votfd t-y Parliament for such purposes. Irrespective of this, a committee of gnntlerueu in Lincoln's Inn, who knew the conduct of Mr. Flower, load provided a fund to assist une should it be required, but no one conutcted with Truth bad anythkg to do wi ( h it. As to Mr. E'ower's action against Truth for lib J, Mr, Trevers conceals the fact of which lie is well aware that tbe action has bjen pending over a yoar and ten months, To-day I saw the editor, who h»s oft?n invitrd Mr. Flower in his columns to *' come on," and ha is not at all phased with Mr. Flower's leluctance to accept his invitation ; in f cfc, he now fen's that the conviction of Mr. Flower by the High Court may,still further influence that gentleman in the direction of delay. I think the editor is about stating to fish for bis costs. I shall not t ouble you farther at this stage ilnn ask you tq'pubii-ih tlnse Facts, I may say'that when I have done with Mr. Fiowtr I may upon my return to F ha o lony have a little to say to his quo/ dam fri-'ud, Mr. Travers.—l am, &c., . Joshua Jone3. Lindor, April 27 - h, 1901.