DR. CAMERONI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a letter in the Daily News of the 10th instant, and signed, by Mr. H. Whorlow, regarding the case of Mr. Lewis Lyons, President of the International Tailors' Union, who is at present undergoing a sentence of six months' imprisonment on a conviction for libelling a firm of tailors, by describing them as "sweaters," in an article in Yiddish in a small trade publication entitled the Jewish Trade Unionist; and whether, considering that Lyons admitted the authorship of the article but was prevented from bringing forward his witnesses in justification because he had failed to give the notice required by law of such a plea, he will look into the statement of the case in the letter referred to with a view, if it is correct, of reducing the sentence?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI am informed by the learned Recorder that the defendant had been dismissed from the service of the prosecutor because his practices were not consistent with honesty; that he had several times applied unsuccessfully to be taken back into the prosecutor's employ, and afterwards published the libel when the prosecutor was a candidate at the recent election to the London County Council. The defendant having stated before the magistrate who committed him that he intended to call witnesses, the prosecutor's solicitors wrote to him on 29th March to inform him, as he was not legally represented, that it would be necessary for him to file a plea of justification if he wished to call witnesses. The Recorder, considering that this letter was sufficient notice to the defendant if he really wished to justify the libel, refused to postpone the trial. The prosecutor was called, and cross-examined by counsel for the defendant. He disproved the allegations in the libel. The learned Recorder informs me that he was satisfied that the libel was a personal attack and not an honest attempt to expose a sweater. I see no ground for interfering with the sentence.
DR. CAMERONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that Mr. Thompson, who was to have appeared as counsel for Mr. Lyons, denied that the prisoner knew anything about the procedure and the necessity of giving notice? I have seen a letter from him to that effect. If it is the case that owing to inability to understand a technical point the man failed to produce evidence, will the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI cannot realise the condition of mind of either Mr. Thompson or Mr. Lyons if they failed to understand a distinct notice that a plea of justification must be filed if witnesses were to be called. They had twelve days before the trial in which to file the plea.
DR. CAMERONPerhaps the right hon. Gentleman is not aware that Mr. Thompson denies having received the notification mentioned.