More rabbits

Further to today's post on Thomas Austin and the supposed 150th anniversary of the rabbit plague, I note an 1866 report by the Geelong Advertiser that -

A few weeks ago, it was our pleasant duty to inform our readers that acclimatisation was flourishing space at Barwon Park, especially referring to the successful hatching of broods of young pheasants. Since then, however, ill luck has attended them, and no less than eighty birds were carried off last week by an epidemic.

Thanks to the courtesy of Thomas Austin, Esq, the proprietor, whose gamekeeper has kept an accurate account of all rabbits killed during the past year, we learn that the total number picked up was 12,608, and many others, say over 500, were lost. The warren, to all appearances, is as full us ever. Some estimate may be formed of what a small beginning may do when we state that the first and only importation of rabbits made by Mr Austin was in December 1859, and the importation consisted of ten couples, one of which, much to the chagrin of the importer, died a day after landing. It is known that since that time over 50,000 have been caught and killed. The greatest number killed in one day last season was 222, and in looking over the book we find that many days averaged over 150.

The number of pheasants shot last year was 63. The hawks have much militated against the successful breeding of the pheasant, and as many as 1200 of these pests were shot during last year, and and as many as 130 were disposed of last month alone. It is believed that the hares are also prospering, over a dozen young ones having been seen romping about in the cool of the evening.

Before concluding this short narrative of the condition of the preserves at Barwon Park we must tender our thanks for the many pleasant days Mr Austin has given to sporting men, whom he is always glad to see. In fact he is, as he states, willing to give any gentleman a day's shooting so long as he does not bag to sell.

Austin - that practitioner of noblesse oblige - expired in time to escape much of the condemnation as putative father of the rabbit plague and starling plague. His wife Elizabeth (1821-1910) made some amends as founder of the Austin Hospital for Incurables, later the Austin Hospital.

By 1872 a correspondent in the Adelaide Register (where only ten years earlier a writer had sniffed that "the shooting of one of them now and then" will be "a matter of trifling importance") wrote that a -

warning against rabbits should be attended to. I have carefully prevented for years any being turned loose at Mount Lofty, in consideration of the numerous market gardeners around its slopes; but a few weeks ago I saw some running about ... and am told that a distinguished summer neighbour of mine also let some go for future sport. If there is sport, depend upon it there will be no cabbages, carrots, turnips or celery.

Three years later an Act to provide for the Suppression of the Rabbit Nuisance (38 and 39 Vic., 1875, No. 16) became law in South Australia, illustrating questions about identity mechanisms (persons with "written authority") and power.

That Act, provided among other things, that

It shall be lawful for any person authorized in writing in that behalf by the District Council of any district which has been duly constituted and declared a Rabbit district, after twenty four hours' notice shall have been given, to enter any land within such Rabbit District, or any land in the neighborhood thereof, not being another district, whether enclosed or not, at any reasonable hour in the daytime, for the purpose of ascertaining if any rabbits are thereupon, and no such person shall be deemed a trespasser by reason of such entry, or be liable for any damage thereby occasioned, unless the same shall be occasioned by such person wilfully, and without necessity: Provided that any person so authorized shall exhibit such written authority, if required to do so by the owner or occupier of such land, or his authorized agent, and if being so required he shall fail to exhibit such authority, then he shall be liable to be deemed and dealt with as a trespasser. ...

If any person shall wilfully obstruct, hinder, or interrupt person appointed by the Commissioner or any District Council, in the exercise of any power, or authority, vested in any such person by this Act; or shall threaten, assault, or use improper language to any such person whilst in the performance of his duty under this Act, every such person so offending shall, for every such offence, forfeit and pay a penalty not exceeding Twenty Pounds: Provided that no proceeding for the recovery of any such penalty, nor the payment thereof, shall be a bar to any action at law by any such person for or in respect of any such assault, but every such action may be commenced and proceeded with as if this Act had not been passed, bylaw or usage to the contrary notwithstanding.

Similar legislation was enacted in Victoria in 1878. In 1887 the colonies of Victoria and South Australia collaborated, unsuccessfully, in building a 'rabbit proof' fence that stretched for a mere 290 miles.

Rabbits in abundance

This week is reportedly the 150th anniversary of the first 'successful' importation of rabbits in Australia, some of whose descendants are currently frolicking in the wet grass outside my office at UC (and will presumably soon be busy adding to the bunny population).

Scholars disagree about the beginnings of rabbit infestation in Australia and the anniversary is problematical. (Governor Phillip was accompanied by five rabbits in 1787; a dispute between John Pascoe Fawkner and Henry Batman in 1836 featured disagreement about the destruction of rabbits and the Governor Gawler arrived at Port Adelaide in 1840 with "30 trusses of hay, a cask of oil, seven whalers' chests and 16 rabbits".)

During December 1859 some 21 wild European rabbits were released into special pens at the 11,7360 hectare Barwon Park estate at Winchelsea (near Geelong) on Christmas Day 1859. They had arrived from England on the brig Lightning. At Barwon Park, home of squatter and Acclimatisation Society member Thomas Austin (1815-1871), they were fed on lettuce that had been specially grown for them. Austin's nephew - in some accounts his brother - had sent him 24 rabbits, five hares, 72 partridges and some sparrows. The latter have been equally prolific, albeit without the serious environmental damage associated with bunnies.

Having recovered from the voyage the rabbits were released so that Austin and other 'Port Phillip Gentlemen' could go hunting. Sources differ on whether 21 or 24 rabbits did the feral thing. Thomas, brother James and associates released rabbits on other grazing properties in Victoria and NSW, reportedly requesting legislation to protect rabbits.

The Brisbane Courier of 7 May 1864 reports that -

At the meeting of the Council of the Queensland Acclimatisation Society, held last week, reference was made by a gentleman present to Barwon Park, in Victoria, the owner of whom, Mr Thomas Austin, had done much to encourage the importation of English game some years ago, and who now was enabled occasionally to invite his friends to join him in a battue. Since the meeting, the following extract, which is taken from the Geelong Advertiser, has come into our possession:

On Thursday last, Mr Thomas Austin, of Barwon Park, entertained a number of his friends to a shooting party. The guests assembled shortly after nine, and after partaking of a substantial breakfast, proceeded to the place of rendezvous - the keeper's lodge. Here guns and ammunition were waiting, and it having got noised abroad in the neighboring village of Winchelsea that there was going to be a battue with the rabbits, a great many volunteer visitors had collected to partake of the sport and the good cheer which circulates so freely. These, with Mr Austin's own men, formed a goodly array of more than twenty-five. The assembled gentlemen then inspected the aviaries, in the immediate vicinity, where a number of pheasants are still confined for those present; with those are thirty-four blackbirds and thrushes, which Mr Austin brought out with him in the Yorkshire.

He was very successful with them on board ship, as out of forty-four taken on board only, ten died during the voyage. In this spacious aviary a number of trees are growing, and have become so luxuriant that they have forced their heads far above the wire network; and it is Mr Austin's intention, after they have incubated in the spring, to open a portion of the roof and give them their liberty. This locality is admirably adapted for their propagation, as all eagles and hawks are destroyed as soon as "they put in an appearance".

Close to this aviary is a four-acre enclosure, surrounded by wire, and made dog proof, if a strange one should come near, but dogs are prohibited from being at large. In this paddock, containing excellent clover, the hares that Mr Austin brought out with him are turned loose, and it is worthy of remark how successfully Mr Austin carried out his idea; instead of obtaining those that have been for some time in confinement, Mr Austin thought it would be more desirable to obtain wild ones, and a week before the Yorkshire sailed those hares were at large, and out of eleven shipped nine were turned into this paddock. The hare is a very timid animal, and the boxes on board ship were so constructed that they might enjoy great privacy, and Mr Austin, knowing how obtrusively curious people are to see such things when landed, had a spring-cart awaiting the arrival of the trains to convoy them at once to Barwon Park, and the same day that they were put ashore they were turned loose.

The rabbits, which have now become very numerous on the estate, are the English wild rabbit; the original stock was sent to him from the old country by his brother, Mr James Austin. They prefer the long grass in the bends of the river to the sedges and rushes on the plains, making their burrows principally on the bare high ground. Through the long grass various pathways had been cut, to give the sportsmen an opportunity of firing. The beaters, provided with sticks, formed themselves into a straight line, bending the long grass and driving the rabbits before them, and so made them bolt into the open.

Shortly after midnight the keepers had been round netting the warrens, and so kept the rabbits from their holes; and although the beaters were so numerous, they had great difficulty in driving the rabbits before, the rabbits evincing the greatest desire to double back, and showing much repugnance to leave their own particular bond. Mr Austin had given permission to have the cock pheasants shot, and so the sportsmen were constantly on the qui vive for a cock to rise; this also gave an interest to the beaters, for, when a hen pheasant put up, a cry of "ware hen" immediately resounded along their rank. Experience has shown that the most productive preserves number about ten hens to each cock.

Mr Austin opened the campaign by having a bang at a handsome cock in full feather, and which was bagged. About one o'clock the party found themselves again in the vicinity of the keeper's cottage, covered with English ivy, and situated in a lovely little valley adjoining the plantations and preserves. While the sportsmen went inside to partake of the good things produced, the beaters formed themselves into picturesque groups on the green slopes around, enjoying the hospitality and abundance of the proprietor; their happy smiling faces showed that they participated in the day's enjoyment. The bright sunny day, with now and then a passing cloud to soften the glare, the chiaroscuro effect on the landscape, the great variety in the tints of the foliage, produced by exotic and indigenous trees being planted singly and in groups around, formed a coup d'oeil seldom witnessed, and must have been seen to be appreciated.

The midday repast being over, and a short spell for smoking allowed, the sportsmen again sallied forth up one side of the river and down the other, every bend of this winding river offering ample sport and diversion. Pheasants were put up over an area extending for four miles; they are well supplied with food, and they keep to the locality. Last year, however, a hen got away as far as Modowarre, and a native youth was surprised to see a rara avis feeding with his fowls in the morning; he was seen busy loading his gun when a person rode up, and he pointed out the prize he was going to bag, when the horseman told him it was one of Mr Austin's pheasants, and the bird's life was therefore spared, and may be the same bird that has selected the neighbouring forest for her habitation, and was lately seen with a brood of eleven surrounding her.

Sunset closed the "laboring day" for shooting, when the killed consisted of 173 rabbits and five pheasants for seven guns, not a bad day's sport; the amount of killed and wounded left on the field was not ascertained. An excellent dinner, provided with the accustomed liberality of the host, brought to a conclusion a most agreeable day's amusement. "The parish lantern" (a full moon) was provided for those who had to wend their way homeward that night.

Books

Having returned from my road trip to Melbourne with Kruger the WonderDog (what a fine dog he is, and fine company like Orr SC) I'm reading miscellaneous Christmas presents and grazing the Michael Kirby website.

Alan Steinweis's Kristallnacht 1938 (Harvard University Press, 2009) is a concise account, perhaps of most value to novices and from my perspective offering less bite than Saul Friedländer's Nazi Germany and the Jews, Volume I: The Years of Persecution, 1933-1939 (HarperCollins, 1997). It's of interest for its microhistories of participants in the 'night of broken glass'.

Wilfred Prest's William Blackstone: Law & Letters in the Eighteenth Century (Oxford University Press, 2008) considers the author of the Commentaries - praised by one contemporary as the "most correct and most beautiful outline that was ever exhibited of any human science" - and other works. Prest takes issue with Jeremy Bentham's attack on the Commentaries and on Blackstone -

... [a] persistent and sustained condemnation of the misanthropic enemy of reason and reform, 'everything-as-it-should-be Blackstone', a muddled and shallow apologist for the status quo. Making up in critical acerbity what it lacked in humdrum detail. Bentham's Blackstone replaced the conscientious and upright scholar, judge and public man with an even more two-dimensional caricature; that of failed barrister turned stodgy Tory academic and confused textbook apologist for the British Constitution and unreformed common law.

Michael Kirby in 309 Australian Book Review (Mar. 2009) 14–15 noted that "Prest frequently reaches the limits of his source materials" and suggested that "what really matters about [Blackstone] today is not so much his life ... more important would be an analysis of what [Blackstone] wrote, and how, often unthinking, it has influenced the law in lands far from Oxford’s dreaming spires". Blackstone's shopping list is interesting but ultimately unimportant; the reception of his work is fundamental.

Martin Wiener's superb An Empire on Trial: Race, Murder and Justice under British Rule, 1870-1935 (Cambridge University Press, 2009) is far more enjoyable ... lucid, persuasive, insightful. I have yet to get into Legal Foundations of Tribunals in Nineteenth-Century England (Cambridge University Press, 2006) by Chantal Stebbings and In The Common Defense: National Security Law for Perilous Times (Cambridge University Press, 2007) by James Baker. Unmarketable: Brandalism, Copyfighting, Mocketing and the Erosion of Integrity (New Press, 2007) by Anne Moore is marketed - oops, that damn M word - as -

both a scathing critique of corporate marketing's dalliances with the cultural underground and a highly entertaining depiction of the absurdity produced by our advertising-saturated late-capitalist wonderland. Here is a world in which cultural resistance and the DIY underground, once refuges from consumer society, have been repurposed by corporations even as the underground itself emerges as a key demographic to be targeted.

All in all, deliciously ahistorical and self-involved.

Death, dads, texts and taxes

Catching up on reading before I go on The Great Road Trip To Melbourne with Kruger and Co ...

Martin Daunton's lucid Trusting Leviathan: The Politics of Taxation in Britain 1799-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2001) and Just Taxes: The Politics of Taxation in Britain 1914-1979 (Cambridge University Press 2002)

Rachel Potter's 'Obscene Modernism and the Trade in Salacious Books' in 16(1) Modernism/Modernity (2009) 88-104 - incidental reading for the 'Forbidden, Hidden & Censored Books' conference in July next year - and the more insightful 'Dancing with the Devil: Publishing Modern Music in the Third Reich' by Kim Kowalke in (2001) 8(1) Modernism/Modernity 1-41 [PDF] 

Jerome Karabel's The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale and Princeton (Houghton Mifflin, 2006), of particular interest for comments on the construction of identity, the assessment of intangibles such as 'character' and mechanisms for exclusion of 'undesirables' (eg people who were described as "hebrews", "negroes" and "intellectuals")

Rachel Fuchs' Contested Paternity: Constructing Families in Modern France (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008)

I've meanwhile been struck by Hilary Mantel's comment at 10 in (2009) LVI(16) New York Review of Books 8-12 on Keith Thomas' The Ends of Life (Oxford University Press, 2009) that -

For every example, as Keith Thomas demonstrates, you can find a counterexample. Some will object that his book is a collage of quotations, a toy box, a magpie hoard: that it does not sustain a thesis. But Thomas' work has always been more about sharing knowledge than winning arguments. In any event, in the field of human behaviour, which is where he has located his efforts, truths are provisional and tentative.

Mantel notes Thomas' references to religious belief -

... many people had trouble envisaging the afterlife; an old Sussex lady on her deathbed, promised that she would soon be in paradise, said that she would rather stay in Lewes.

That sounds quite reasonable to me.

The Globe and Mail - in reviewing Beautiful Pigs: Portraits of Fine Breeds (St. Martin's, 2009) by Andy Case, photographs by Andrew Perris - notes that -

The young Berkshire is a naughty pig with a lively character. Its back is long and level, and it has a high-set tail with well-sprung ribs ... [It] is well up on its toes, enabling it to walk well.

Nothing like a naughty pig to lift the spirits after a wrestle with Bordieu!

Pigs are not malicious or miscreant. Quite the opposite. They are as intelligent and elegant as any animal out there (hygiene and eating habits notwithstanding), they are fiercely maternal, proud, brave, stubborn and sensitive creatures, and they are the source of civilization's greatest side dish (bacon).

Praise the Lord and pass the contribution

A reader's complained that I was rather cruel about practioners of the 'gospel of prosperity' and pentecostal belief systems (singing, shaking, speaking in tongues, exorcisms, bullying of deviationists, denouncing Bruce Springstein as "the high priest of satan"). We should apparently ignore critiques and memoirs such as Behind the Exclusive Brethren (Scribe, 2008) by Michael Bachelard and People In Glass Houses: An Insider's Story of a Life in and out of Hillsong (Black Inc, 2007) by Tanya Levin or criticism by Family Court judges. 

 I was thus interested to see today's SMH item - yes, the time of the year when the mass media are desperate for filler - reporting that newspaper's survey of belief [PDF]. The SMH quotes a response from Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, a vocal exponent of the 'gay = abomination' school, who claimed that the survey results show the religious instinct was universal.

There was no denying that increased numbers of people described themselves as non-believers, but this was no boon to the atheist cause, he said. "The decline of Christian faith does not lead to lack of religious belief; it just opens the way for superstition".

Quite so. Notions of a heavenly father with a deep personal interest in every sparrow (albeit a certain inattention regarding several million Jewish kiddies and oldies in the 1940s, not to mention Armenians, tsunami victims and so forth) and a virgin birth, proficiency in conversion of water into wine, resurrection etc etc are presumably scientific rather than mere vulgar superstition. 

 Nearly half of the 1,000 people polled by Nielsen for the SMH reported belief in psychic powers such as extrasensory perception. 41% believe in astrology. 34% believe UFOs exist. Women are supposedly much more likely to believe in God and other phenomena than men, with the exception of UFOs. 63% of the surveyed Australians "believe in God or a universal spirit". 24% do not believe in either God or a universal spirit. 50% reported that religion is "important or very important in their lives", although the survey did not indicate whether that importance was reflected in behaviour and "committed Christians" might of course behave in ways that their irreligious peers consider to be repugnant, indeed illegal. 88% of the faithful indicated that they were either absolutely or fairly certain in their belief. 29% reported that the Bible is "the word of God", "to be taken literally, word for word". (Bad news, presumably for people wearing blended fabrics of animal & vegetable fibre ... stand next to the witches and those who question the righteousness of owning slaves.) 

 63% believe in miracles and 51% claim to believe in angels. 53% believe in life after death; 56% in heaven and 38% believe in hell. 49% expressed a faith in "psychic powers such as ESP"; 41% believe in astrology. 37% of respondents believe in Satan, a tad more than the 34% who believe in UFOs and 22% who believe in witches. 

Regrettably there seem to have been no questions about Elvis or the peregrination of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. The self-professed 'Christian' cohort was asked about specific beliefs regarding Christ. 94% of the cohort believed he was a real person who lived some 2,000 years ago, with 91% believing that he was the son of God but only 72% believing that the mother of Jesus Christ was a virgin. 32% of respondents believe in an evolutionary process "guided by God". 23% believe the Biblical account of the origin of human beings (ie Eve generated from Adam's rib and so forth), affirming that "God created human beings, largely in their present form, at one time in the last 10,000 years or so".

Blood, butchery and barristers

Two defamation decisions out today.

Daniel Snedden (aka Dragan Vasiljkovic) lost his defamation case against The Australian. Snedden had been accused of war crimes in the Balkan. He sued publishers Nationwide News Ltd (ie the local newspaper arm of the Murdoch conglomerate) over a story printed in 2005.

A jury found that the story had several defamatory meanings, including that Snedden condoned the rape of women. (Ethnic cleansing in the region of course featured rape of noncombatant boys and men, but we don't like to talk about that).

The NSW Supreme Court ruled in favour of Nationwide, after the publisher argued a truth defence.

Snedden, who has dual nationality, vowed to appeal. He commented that "We think anyone who read the transcripts and reads this judgement will consider it a disgrace. This is a gross miscarriage of justice". The Federal Court, in Snedden v Republic of Croatia [2009] FCAFC 111, earlier this year allowed an appeal against his extradition to Croatia. A Commonwealth government appeal in the High Court against that decision is under consideration, with observers commenting that if the appeal is unsuccessful the nation will be harbouring a citizen who has been found by an Australian civil court to have committed war crimes.

The SMH reports that -

The Supreme Court is satisfied he committed the war crime of torture, participated in organised rape and admitted committing a massacre during the Balkans war. But Daniel Snedden is free in the community despite attempts by the Croatian Government to extradite him for prosecution.

Also known as Dragan Vasiljkovic or Captain Dragan, he is accused of war crimes while commanding a Serb paramilitary unit in Croatia in the early 1990s and sued for defamation after The Australian reported in 2005 on his alleged conduct during the conflict. ... In the Supreme Court yesterday, Justice Megan Latham found a string of imputations were "substantially true" and Mr Snedden "was loose with the truth when it suited his purposes".

"The systematic abuse, humiliation and deprivation visited upon those whom the plaintiff sought to punish and subdue at the Knin fortress, the old hospital prison and the Sremska Mitrovika prison, was consistent with the plaintiff's stated aim to drive out non-Serbs from the Krajina [frontier]", Justice Latham said. The accounts of electrocution, regular beatings and mock executions, carried out at the behest of, or with the authority of, the plaintiff, were harrowing."

The judgement - not yet available on AustLII - notes disagreement about convictions for offences committed in Australia prior to Snedden becoming a paramilitary.

The Australian editorialised that -

IT was a good day for the freedom of the press yesterday when The Australian was not punished in the courts for publishing the truth. Our victory in a defamation case brought by former Serbian paramilitary commander Dragan Vasiljkovic, also known as "Captain Dragan", involved us conducting a quasi-war crimes investigation in the former Yugoslavia in order to defend ourselves in a civil court in Sydney. We incurred high costs in marshalling chilling testimony from Vasiljkovic's Croatian and Bosnian victims. To prove that he raped a woman and committed the war crime of torture during the war in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s meant we undertook work normally left to the criminal courts or The Hague, albeit with a less onerous burden of proof.

That we were compelled to take this course of action should concern anyone with a commitment to justice, press freedom and the public's right to know. After our 2005 publication of Vasiljkovic's actions, Croatia began pursuing him for alleged war crimes. Our report prompted a defamation case fought on Vasiljkovic's behalf by Clive Evatt QC. Common sense suggested any war crimes process should precede the defamation hearing. Instead, we were forced to defend our publication without assistance from Croatia, whose files remained closed to us.

It would have been easier -- and cheaper -- to settle but we had strong evidence to back a story that we believed was manifestly in the public interest. Our decision was vindicated by yesterday's judgment but we face further action from Vasiljkovic, who has taken another defamation case against us over similar allegations.

It is time for the Law Reform Commission to take a close look at the way defamation law is being played out since the capping of damages and consider whether this is leading to an increase in litigation. Defamation actions are expensive to defend and plaintiffs generally do not have to produce any evidence of an ability to pay costs if they lose.

Mainstream media outlets, like our own, accept the ethical responsibility to pursue issues in the public interest. It is our core business to reveal stories such as that of "Captain Dragan". But it is not clear the public interest is served when the blogosphere defames with impunity, while litigants target big media companies that continue to pursue their job of publishing the truth.

Meanwhile the Supreme Court has found in favour of Fairfax Media (publisher of the Sydney Morning Herald) and critic Matthew Evans, whose memoir recently featured in this blog.

They had been sued by Aleksandra Gacic, Ljiljana Gacic and Branislav Ciric, the owners of King Street Wharf restaurant Coco Roco, over Evans' September 2003 review of that venue. He referred to Coco Roco as "a bleak spot on the culinary landscape", slammed the food ("more than half the dishes" he tried were "unpalatable"), described the restaurant's overall value as "a shocker" and gave it a score of 9/20 (ie in the "stay home" category). Coco Roco went into administration in March 2004.

In the initial case leading barrister Clive Evatt alerted the jury that he had it on good authority that "defendants are stoned to death for defamation in Serbia". The jurors found that the review did convey imputations that the restaurant sold unpalatable food and provided bad service. However, that was not seen as defamatory. The jury also found that the review did not convey imputations that prices were excessive or that the owners were incompetent restaurateurs.

The 'Coco Rico trio' then appealed, arguing that what the jury found was unreasonable. In Aleksandra Gacic & v John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited & Anor [2006] NSWCA 175 [here] the NSW Court of Appeal agreed with that argument, finding that it was defamatory to say the food was unpalatable and the service bad. The appeal court referred the question of whether the newspaper imputed the owners were incompetent back for another jury trial.

Fairfax and Evans next appealed to the High Court, arguing that the Court of Appeal exceeded its powers in rejecting the jury decision. In 2007 the High Court ruled 6-1 in favour of the trio in John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Gacic [2007] HCA 28; 235 ALR 402 [here]. Justice Michael Kirby disagreed with the finding that no reasonable jury could find it wasn't defamatory to declare a restaurant sold bad food and offered poor service, perceptively commeting that on matters such as criticism of a restaurant's food and service, jurors were much more likely to reflect community standards than judges and that "astonishing as it may seem, judges may occasionally lack a sense of irony or humour".

The High Court found that the review conveyed three defamatory meanings -

that Coco Roco sold some unpalatable food, that it provided some bad service, and that the trio were incompetent restaurant owners because they employed a chef who made poor quality food.

Crucially, there are defences in dealing with those meanings. They were successfully raised when the dispute returned to the Supreme Court for further trial of the undetermined imputation, for consideration of any defences available to Fairfax and Evans, and for the questions of damages. Legal costs mounted and the trio had meanwhile been the subject of bankruptcy proceedings, eg Banov v Ciric [2008] FMCA 353 [here].

Justice Ian Harrison in the Supreme Court ordered the former restaurant owners to pay the legal costs of Fairfax and Evans. He found the defence of comment had been established in relation to the three meanings. He also found the defence of truth had been established in relation to the statement regarding some bad service.

Exit Big Liz

The Victorian Attorney General, Rob Hulls, has announced that from 1 January 2010 criminal legal proceedings in state law will be brought in the name of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) rather than in the name of the Queen, ie the rather rich lady who is head of an established church, lives in another country and got her job (for life) by being her father's daughter.

Reference to the DPP rather than to Ms Windsor is not particularly revolutionary; she's already been removed in legal proceedings in Tasmania and Western Australia. The change - effected through the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) - has, however, apparently caused some diehard monarchists to suffer deep distress: I had visions of them spraying the cornflakes over the doily or perhaps choking on a kipper as they read the sad sad news.

The Age (it's Christmas, after all, news is slow and devotees of the idiot box are suffering from Carbonhagen Fatigue) made a bid for attention by announcing that -

Monarchists and republicans have gone to war over the State Government's decision to dump the Queen from Victoria's legal system.

Supporters of the Queen yesterday accused Attorney-General and Acting Premier Rob Hulls of trying to transform Victoria into a republic by stealth.

But Mr Hulls, an avowed republican, hit back, saying monarchists were inventing ludicrous conspiracy theories when all he was trying to do was modernise the state's justice system.

Oh dear, diddums, as one of my feistier students is wont to say.

The A-G reasonably explains that the change reflects his Government's "commitment to modernise and simplify laws" -

Referring to the Queen is outdated. Substituting the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for the Queen or Regina reflects the legal and political independence from the United Kingdom and its monarch that has been achieved by Australia. ... This is a further step to bring our legal system into the 21st century.

It is also consistent with the passage of the Australia Acts which terminated the power of the United Kingdom Parliament to legislate for Australia, removed the ability of the Queen to disallow or suspend federal or state laws, and abolished appeals from the High Court to the Privy Council.

The change followed removal in 2000 of the requirement for new lawyers to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen and substitution of 'Senior Counsel' for 'Queens Counsel' (the latter perhaps being more regretted by senior members of the profession than deletion of references to Her Majesty.