OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2524, 13 September 1888, Page 3

OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

[FBOM OUK OWN OOUKEItrONDKNT].

Sydney, August 2S. The great libel action Dibbs v. Baily Telegraph is engrossing the attention of those who are out of the reach of the cost and trouble. It will be remembered that Mr Dibbs, when Colonial Treasurer, was charged with converting a surplus into a deficit by the "short and easy method" of altering the figures. The Daily Telegraph, fortilied by the evidence of Mr Thompson, late chief accountant at the Treasury, accused him of" criminal concealment," and challenged him to take proceedings against them for libel. This he has now done, and lays his damages at £25,000. The defendants put in a pica that their statement was true, and for the public good, and paid 40s into Court as lull satisfaction for any undue warmth of language, into which they might have been betrayed. The first plea, however, was struck out by the court. It. seems that in the present state of the law one can only plead justification successfully if he is able to prove the literal and exact truth of every expression made use of. For instance, "one article complained of begins:—"Every newspaper in the country is ringing, &c." Now, to get a verdict on the score of justification, it would be necessary not only to prove that the plaintiff had been guilty of criminal concealmeut of the finances, but that every newspaper in the colony had literally been ringing with it, which is of course impracticable. Any one familiar with the ordinary forms of journalistic rhetoric will see from this why it is next to impossible that any newspaper can clear itself by pleading "the public good" in reply to a libel action. Mr Dibbs was under crossexamination the greater part of Tuesday, and his admissions throw a great deal of light on that important question :—" With how little wisdom a country can be governed." The line of examination taken by plaintiffs counsel seems to point to the imputation of private pique as the motive for writing the articles. The case will probably ocenpy the greater part of the week.

Another important trial which caused much comment was Haynes v. Fletcher. The latter gentleman seized Mr Haynes by the throat, whilst he was in the middle of a speed) in the Assembly, and shook him, so the Premier says, " like a dog would shake a cat," the excuse beiug the offeusiveneas of the language cmployed by Mr Haynes, who rather prides himself on his powers of satire and sarcasm. The latter claimed £5000 damages. Mr Fletcher thought £"> was ample amends. The jury decided that 11 r Fletcher was nearer the mark than Mr Haynes, and gave him the verdict accordingly, thereby considerably shocking the good folks who had hoped for a condign vindication of Parliamentary decency. One is forcibly reminded of a noted American assault case story, wherein the weapons and missiles employed by the combatants were brought into court. It was shown that the defendant had used a dead cat, a shot gun- a maul, a clothes prop, a buzz saw, and a pitchfork. The plaintiff, on the other hand, had called in the services of a fence rail, a meat axe, a ladder, a bed-post, and a The jury, as soon as they were able to take in the facts, promptly returned a verdict that they would have given a dollar apiece to .see the fight. They might have been cousins to the Haynes-Fletcher Solons. At any rate, their finding had about as much pertinence to the facts. Law aud lawyers have been very much to the fore during the week. There is yet another case which deserves comment. I refer to the Sydney Newspaper Publishing Co. v. Muir. decided by the Full fjourt, on Monday. Plaintiffs publish a Sunday newspaper. It had been decided by the Court below, that they could not recover their advertising account from the defendant, because the performance of their contract involved an illegal actnamely, the publishing of a newspaper on Sunday. Against this decision the plaintiffs appeal at the Full Court was upheld. The Chief Justice, in awarding victory to the his defence as "unrighteous, msßolnest, and dissreditable." It is worth-making a note that the Chief Justice, from his place on the bench, declares that the administration of law instead of justice has at last reached euch a pitch as entirely to frustrate the object for which it was instituted. The immenso impetus which was given to company promoting by the silver " boom " is beginning to bear its legitimate fruits. The heads of unscrupulous people were turned by the immense sums which were diverted from the pockets of the credulous and greedy public to those of still more greedy promoters, "if not robbers," and " go-betweens " a new and easy short cut to wealth hid been found, and it soon became crowded. All the 8VR?l«lilr- rash «•■'.« soon absorbed in tlu> hundred* of enterprise's winch v.-cre launched. Hut from that day to this scarcely anything has been returned from Jhew, nor is there apy Bound reason for

hoping that anything will be. (nils continue to be made with exasperating regularity, often going into the pockets of men who have done worse than nothing to earn them. Worse than all now the glamour is passing away it is found that the representations on which ninny of these companies were formed were shamefully and impudently misleading They enriched sharpers, but tlxy impoverished subscribers, and diverted to unwholesome gambling, funds which should have been productively employed. It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that in all quarters there is talk of winding up, of liquidation, and in some cases of criminal proceedings for fraudulent practices. Now, as in the days of the fable, there are a hundred bad ways of getting rich, and they mostly end in poverty. There is some hope, now this is being so plainly demonstrated, that there may be a return to the one good way of steady, welldirected, and productive industry. A Persian, named Johaiin Ibrahim, who styled himself a Roman Catholic priest, and said he was collecting money for a Church in his own country, was sent to gaol for six months' the other day as an impostor. Some five hundred pounds was found on his persou, and he had, moreover, letters purporting to be written by high Eastern dignitaries. The Ecclesiastical authorities here, however, disowned him, and it was chiefly on their evidence that he was convicted. Against that conviction he appealed en Tuesday as being against the weight of evidence. His appeal was sustained, he was set at liberty, and his money will be returned to him.