Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE DUNEDIN LIBEL CASE.

HOW MR. MAC ASSET FELT AGGRIEVED, asd the SATISFACTION HE OBTAINED. The Auckland Star thus reviews the case : The case in its various bearings may serve to point a moral, and there is much in it that would adorn a tale. Mr Macassey is a lawyer and a politician. He is, no doubt, in his own way, and certainly in his own estimation, a very clever man. On the 21st of June Mr Macassey was enjoying himself in Britain, heedless of the surging current of life and thought in Dunedin ; but those he had left behind were not unmindful of him. On that day there appeared in the columns of the Dunedin Star an article which was destined to disturb Mr Macassey's equanimity and create the great turmoil that has closed to the originators, but has opened up new issues which may exercise an important influence not only in Otago but throughout the colony for years to come. ¥e allude to the question of telegraphic secresy which has sprung from the Supreme Court proceedings instituted by Mr Macassey. The article which caused all this commotion related to a Chinese petition praying for the removal of Mr Richard Beetham from his position of R.M. and Warden in the Wakatip goldfields district. The petition was presented to the Council by Mr Macassey, who secured the appointment of a commission to inquire into Mr Beetham's conduct. There were several translations of the petition, differing in one or two material points, but the one published by the Star stated in substance that the Chinese were very anxious to get Mr Beetham removed from his position, and a clever lawyer from Dunedin has offered to get him removed for £2OO, said .£2OO only to be paid in the event of his removal; that the Chinese approve of this proposal, aud that each individual who signs undertakes to pay a certain subscription towards the amount required. Commenting upon the whole matter the Star said that during his candidature for the General Asse:nj)ly Mr Macassey entered a criminal action for libel against the Wakatip mail, which Mr Beetham most properly dismissed, and, says the Star, " From that time Mr Macassey appears to have become aware of Mr Beetham's short comings both as Resident Magistrate and Returning Officer. In the latter capacity he attacked Mr Beetham on the hustings, and failing to make on impression there, wrote to the Colonial Secretary stating that lie had sundry Gharges to bring against him—charges, we ma)' remark, which he never even attempted to sub stantiate. The Chinese petition represents the results of his labours against Mr Beetham as Resident Magistrate." Speaking of the Chinese charges against Warden Beetham the Starsaid: "This statement, in the translation signed by Mr Ma'cassey, and presented

by him to tho Council, is transformed by him iuto a petition, arid all mention of ' the clever lawyer from Dunediu' and of the guarantee of tho £2OO is judiciously omitted. Tho case would be sufficiently shady even were this the whole of it; but there are further facts to come —Eirst, tho Commissioners appointed by the Council entirely exonerated Mr Beetham from the charges brought against him; secondly, the evidence of an expert proved that the greater number of signatures attached to the potitiou were written by the same hand : evidence which accounts for the fact that sundry Chiuese whose signatures purported to be attached to the petition declared to the Commissioners their total ignorance of the matter; and lastly Mr Maccassey's statement to the Council that he had no hand in getting up this petition has heeu most distinctly contradicted. Taken altogether the affair was as discreditable a matter as any that ever came before the Council." It also spoke of tho "pretended petition" being " concocted," and made other remarks which it left open for Mr Macassey to fix to himself or leave alone. This constituted the alleged libel, and as that gentleman's counsel pathetically observed in introducing the case—" No man could enjoy himself at home when things like this were being said of him behind his back," and his client, therefore, on receiving a copy of the'paper, set out post-haste for the colony to bring the offenders to book, and, estimating the damage to his feelings and character at £IOOO, tried to persuade twelve of his fellow-countrymen into giving it. It was stated during the trial that Judge Ward was author of the article, and efforts were made to induce MiBell, the proprietor of tho Star and defendant,to give up t'.ie writer's name; but this he declined to do, and manfully accepted the responsibility of the article. The defendant relied on plea?, maintaining the truth of the statements in the article, and claiming that they were justifiable comments and without malice, in which the jury sustained him by giving a verdict for the . defendant. This verdict has placed Mr Maecassey in a most unfortunate dilemua, and happy would he have been had he shewn a wise discretion by allowing his absence from the colony to pload his excuse for not replying to the Star's criticism. How very unenviable Mr Maeassyv's position has become may be judged from the line of action taken by him in supporting his case. We mav quote as an instance tho evidence of the Eev Dr Stuart, who was called by Mr Macassey to show the effect the article would have on the plaintiff's character. The rev. gentleman said : —"lf all that the article contained was true he would never give him political or social countenance until he apologised to Mr Beetham, aud tho Council, and his friends. He would think very little of a man guilty of what was stated with respect to" the £2OO. He would not have such a man as cither a legal adviser or a friend. If the other comments were true, Mr Macassey should never be returned to any legislative body.'" Other witnesses gave testimony much to the same effect. Now, viewing tho whole case by tho light of tho verdict given by the jury, together with the refusal of the judge to grant a new trial, Mr Macassey must, we should imagine, regard the upshot as extremely unfortunate, and sincerely wish he had left libel processes alone.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WEST18740605.2.10

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Westport Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1182, 5 June 1874, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,046

THE DUNEDIN LIBEL CASE. Westport Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1182, 5 June 1874, Page 2

THE DUNEDIN LIBEL CASE. Westport Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1182, 5 June 1874, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert