CRIMINAL LIBEL.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4211, 6 September 1892, Page 3

CRIMINAL LIBEL.

£ L Haggen Before the Court.

No Defence to Offer. |By Telegraph.—Press Association

Wellington, Tuesday, The cliargo of criminal libel preferred against E. A. Haggen, proprietor, publisher and editor of the Woodvillo Examiner, by William Syins, chemist, of Woodville, is being heard ia the Supreme Court to-day, Mr W, B, Edwards appears for the prosecutor and Mr S. Baker for the accused. It appears that Haggen accused a certain person (who, the indictment states, was the prosecutor) of hnving seduced a young woman in Woodville, and then procured her miscarriage. This statement was made on ihe authority of a doctor, who was called in to the woman when she was supposed to be dying, She told the doctor her story and the outcome was that the police wero communicated with, but when the woman recovered she deoiod most of the statements she had made on her sick bed and in consequence of the insufficiency of the evidence the police dropped the case. The article also suggested that the influenco of Government had been brought to bear to burk enquiry, Mr Synis being a Justicu of the Peace, The accused pleaded not guilty, Mr Edwards said the libel was of the very worst kind that could be published, as it charged a man with a criminal offence and would tend to destroy his business, Tlio libol was vory plain and direct, and lie thought the jury would havo no difficulty in arriving at a decision,

The publication of the newspaper and article was admitted by the defence, Dr Milne, of Woodville, gave evidence to the effect that he knew to whom the libel referred, as he had a conversation with Haggen, who told him ho had an article in type accusing Syrns of seduction and procuring abortion. A long argument then ensued between Judge Prendergast and Mr Baker as to tho relevancy of evidence concerning Mr Syrns' mode of business, Mr Baker contended that the occasion was a privileged one and that tho accused was entitled to show that he had good grounds for what he had written and on that view asserted bis right to bring evidence in reference to all the surroundings of tho matter. His Honor held distinctly that the

occasion was net privileged, Mr Baker was proceeding to arguo that it was the duty of overyone to assist in tho detection of crime, when His Honor observed that if a man intended to publish a libellous article with the idea of suppressing crime and with a good intention, he was guilty of a criminal act. In the present case there was the intentianal publication of libellous matter, and to that charge there could be no answer, Mr Baker: Well tb'at observation practically amounts to this; that we have no defence. His Honor; Yes, There is no defence unless you prove the truth of the libel, JJr Milno was then allowed to leave the witness box, His Honor ruling that the evidence as to the grounds Haggen had for publishing the article were altogether irrelevant, This concluded the case for the plaintiff, Mr Baker said that as he had not raised the plea of justifiction lie had no evidence to call, Lamb. On the direction of the Chief Justico the jury found Haggen guilty. The Judge hears Mr Baker on the mitigation ot tho sentence at three o'oloofe.