THE TIMARU LIBEL CASE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1540, 23 April 1887, Page 2

THE TIMARU LIBEL CASE

IVH.S3 V. KBRR. The following is the " Lyitelton Times" eport of yesterday's proceedings m this The action was continued, to-day, y Mr Joynt, for the defence, oalled S. Uundeis, formerly editor and reporter or the " Guardian " ; He had h«ard the ihalleDge, and retained a distinct impreslion that the two railways were menionei. ■ < Sergeant Folton said be had no interest n either party at the time of the election, 3Ut he was very clear aa to the words of :ho challenge, viz, "I never misrepresented Mr Wright m connection with the Rika'a and Aahburton Forks railway, nor the Mount Somera railway, and- 1 will stake £50, if Mr Wright will do the lame, the loser to give it to some looal oharity." 0 Purnell remembered distinctly being one of a deputation that waitec 1 ou Mr Tvess about the bet on that occasion. Mr 17658 demurred to the two lines being included, but witness was positive they were originally specified by Ivess. E. G. Wright's evidenae was entirely m favor of defendant's contention. Mr Shaw, then editor of the " South Canterbury Times," had a conversation with witness, previous to tne publication of the alleged libel, E, G. Kerr, proprietor *' South Canterbury Timeß," said the advertisement aa to circulation was m his paper long before Mr Iveas took over the (> Herald." He did not see the article till it was pnb'ithed that night, and did not know Mr • Ivess was absent. When he got the solicitor's letter demanding an apology, he wrote to Mr Wright to make sura of the facts, and on receipt of bis reply decided not to answer Messrs Wilding and Co. G J. Shaw, formerly editor of the "South Canterbury Times" and now sub-editor of the " Lyttelton Times," acknowledged the authorship of the alleged libel. After the luncheon adjournment, counsel add: eased the Court, and his Honor BUmmoned up, pointing out that the stingy. 'of the libel was In the word " Bhuffle," and it was foe the jury to consider how far the evidence bore this out. The jury retired at 4 20. At 5 45' they returned, and m reply to his Honor, they intimated that three-fourths of them were agreed. His Honor inti anted that he would received a ihree-fourthß vordiot At 7.15 the Court eat Bgain, and the jury returned the following verdict ? — •' That wo conbider the matter complained of not a libel m the sonsa complained of by the plainiiff," Mr Wilding asked his Honor to put it to the jury to return a pure. verdict. After argument his Honor did so, and the foreman replied " Tnree-fourttas of the jury are of opinion that the article 1b not a libel" Judgment was given for defendant with costs on the lower scale. Mr Wilding asked that exeoution for costs be stayed until he should move m banco for a new trial. tiia Honor refused the application, and the Court then adjourned.