A CONSUL’S CLAIM.
NO EVIDENCE ON OATH. “AN AMBASSADOR OF THE UNITED STATES.” Auckland, Sept. 9. A peculiar position arose in a case that came before Mr. W. R. McKean, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court. It was in a dispute arising out of delay in the delivery of goods ordered from the United States. Mr. E. Inder said he had intended to call the United States Consul to state the position of affairs in America during the period the delay in delivery occurred. The Consul was willing to come to court and make a statement, but had intimated that as an Ambassador of the United States he was precluded from giving evidence on oath. The question was whether the court was prepared to accept such a statement, and, if so, whether counsel on ;the other side was willing for it to be accepted when not given on oath. ■Mr. Gould said he must have the right of cross-examination if a statement was made. Mr. Inder said if the Consul could not be sworn he might object to be cross-examined. Mr. McKean said he would hesitate to accept the Consul’s statement if he refused to submit to cross-examination.
Mr. Inder then elected to proceed with the case without asking the Consul to attend.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19210913.2.70
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, 13 September 1921, Page 7
Word count
Tapeke kupu
212A CONSUL’S CLAIM. Taranaki Daily News, 13 September 1921, Page 7
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in