THE WANGANUI LIBEL CASE.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14985, 4 June 1914, Page 10

THE WANGANUI LIBEL CASE.

VERDICT FOR PLAINTIFF.

DAMAGES. £1000

(SPECIAL TO "TTF! rBF<-S ". WANGANUI, June 3. Tho libel action, Patterson v. Smytho. claim £2000 damages, which has aroused considerable attention in various parts of the Dominion, concluded at 12.30 a.m. to-day. The parties are well known. Mrs Patter-son is a very pretty young woman, wife of Mr Patteison. partner in the weil-known firm of Gibson and Patterson, and daughter of Air Mowlem, of Palmerston North. Mr and Mrs Sniythe are local people, comfortably off. Ihe.V formerly had a hotel he.c. Mr Smythe is now acting as a land agent in Wellington. Mr Geo. Hutchison appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr T. M. Wili'ord. M.P., with him Mr N. G. Armstrong, appeared for the defendants. gkin a nutshell, the case was that Mrs Patterson was a neighbour of the Smythes, and both lived close to the Wanganui Boy_' Collegiate School. Mis Patterson did not have a telephone Mrs Smythe had, ai.d Mrs Patterson made use of it several times to ring up somo of the boys in the Collego. Mrs Smythe disapproved, and apparently not liking tiie ways of the young people, wrote an anonymous letter, allegedly irom Palmerston jSorth, to the Rev. Mr Dove, the College heatimiuster, making allegations of misconduct against Mrs Patterson and a lad named Miles, a prefect, aged 18. She followed this up with another to the rector's wife, making further allegations, and this time included another young man named A. Hatrick. Mr Patterson, tho husband of plaintiff, was away in Australia at tho timo. and during his absence Mrs Patterson had her mother and sister, 'Miss Mowlem (Painierston North), besides other iViends, staying with her. On no occasion wero any of the young fellows in the houso alono with her, and according to the evidence there was nothing to suggest that illicit relationship occurred. Portions of tho letter to Mrs Dove wero declared by his Honour in summing up as "pure fiction." In this letter Mrs Smythe wrote; "This is not the first young man that has got into trouble over this woman. A young man named Hatrick had to leave town through her, and that is why she is being watched. No doubt from what my husband tells mc, ' sho is a most wicked woman, for thero aro other things she has done, also that may lead her into trouble. Several of the boys at the College know and ] ha\. told their parents, and it is coming to be the talk of the town. I thought it only my duty to let you know after what I had heard. I cannot give you my name, as my husband j has forbidden mo to." ~ j When accused of writing theso letters, Mrs Smytho denied their author- i ship, and though opportunity was given to apologise, the denial was maintained until after proceedings in Court commenced. George Wilfred Harden, manager of th. Bank of Now South Wales, Wanganui, and an expert on handwriting, was first called. Ho said ho behaved, after a comparison of admitted writings of Mrs Smythe with tho alleged documents, that the latter wero written by Mrs Smytho. Mr Wilford, who appeared for defendant, then admitted authorship, but. pleaded justification. Defendant and her husband gave considerable evidence, in which improper conduct was suggested. Ono of the allegations was that Mrs Patterson frequently came to a window with ah X-ray garment on, and would fold her haro arms as if in an embrace, and throw kisses to Miles, who was a short distance off. They also alleged that Miles had been scon in her arms and had kissed her. These allegations were-stoutly denied, and his Honour subsequently pointed out that if such a thing had taken place it would have been the act of an abandoned woman making su~<ree±ions to get a young man ifito the house for immoral purposes. There was, he 6aid, absolutely 'no evidence in eup-ort of this, and the allegation that Hatrick had to leave Wanganui in consequence of plaintiff was proved to be untrue. Rather a peculear development arose in connexion with a telegram sent to Miles and never received by him. Miles, examined regarding tho telcn-am, said that he went to Christchurch with tho College four, and. was to havo returned with the boat. Before leaving, Mrs Patterson invited him to dino with her and her husband. On the Sunday following his (witness s) return his reason for waiting in Wellington for the Main Trunk train m-i-toad of coming on by tho morning express. w_w ihat he wanted to visit his home, and also wished to see tho boat properly shipped. He stayed in Wellington on his doctor's advice, consequent on a breakdown he sustained in one of tho races at Christchurch, and was on the way to Wanganui when the telegram was sent to him. He had never received it. How defendants came to bo in possession ot the -telegram will be for .Departmental enquiry to ascertain, ii*. view of Miles'*, evidence. The evidence of plaintiff went to show that Mrs Smythe got very confidential at times as regards her own domestic affairs. On one occasion, it was alleged, she told Mrs Patterson she never enjoyed shows when Smythe was with her, and that he had come home one evening "three sheets in tho windJ" and that he did not allow her sufficient money. Miss Mowlem, in her evidence, corroborated this aspect, and said that Mrs Smytho had confided in her, had told her not to trn*t her husband further than she could see him. Mrs Smythe frequently complained of her shortage of money, and on one occasion had asked her to assist her to got 2« 6d by telling her husband that she (Mrs Smythe) owed it to witness. HIS HONOUR'S ADDRESS TO THE JURY. Mr Justice Edwards, in the course of

a very lengthy address to the jury, had something to say concerning anonymous authorship and protecting, public morality. With regard to the former aspect, his Honour said these were anonymous letters, and anonymous letters were not favoured by the British race. Writing letters like these was like stabbing in the dark. The defendants had said that they had some justification, and that Mrs Smythe did this to hide her identity of authorship, and that she considered her actions in this respect in the best interests of Mrs Patterson. This must seem a somewhat evading excuse. Would it not have been more womanly to have gone to.Mrs Patterson herself and said, "Well, you are making a fool of yourself with these boys, and you had-better drop it?" Then if Mrs Patterson did not tako any notice, it was open to the defendant to go to the Rev. Mr 2>ove, headmaster, in confidence,, and ask him to respect the confidence and say to him something like this: —"Now Mrs Patterson is carrying on with one of the boys at yonr school. It is not good for either of them, and Task you in their interests to stop it by keeping better guard on the hoys." Would not this, his Honour arguod, have been a better way of protecting the public morality? It would be noticed that a letter was also written ,to Mrs Dove, also that Mrs Smythe had written the letters at a time when

she could not have known very much about the parties' conduct, though thf> letter conveyed the, impression that the course of conduct and been going on for some time. The first letter —that frotn Palmerston North—alleged that the niatier was a public scandal as far down as -"that town. Did that not bear evidence that the letters were not written solely in the interests of public morality ? Regarding the protection of public inaru.i.y his Honour said both letters had to be considered together. If a law-abiding citiz.r.ess saw an improper act going on iv connexion with a public institution, and felt it her duty to rail the attention of the authorities to it, she should leave the responsibility oi" the reme.y to tho authorities whose duty it was to attend to the.se matters. Of course, person might not think this sufficient. Uhforturfately, Mrs Smythe had gone further. She had written a good deal that had not been substantiated by evidence, and this on the pretext that it was true It would have been much more, generous to have said what she had seen herself, and not what she had only heard. Why had Mrs Smythe departed from tho truth? If these letters, as they purported to be, were written solely in the interests 'of the morality of the boys, they were privileged, but were they? Mrs Smythe was not satisfied with making insinuations against the conduct of the lad Miles. She had without any excuse, dragged in Hattrick, who at the time was in America. Why did sho him in? Sho could not hope to provo that what had happened long before, and concerning a \ man in America, had anything to do with influencing the protection of public morals. Tho motive to be considered in tbe matter was solely that of tho protection of the public. Very grave charges had been made and insisted on up till the last moment, and this would havo to be taken into consideration in any damages the jury awarded if they considered the allegations not proved. In conclusion, his Honour DOinted out that great public interest had been tnken in the ease, and wide publicity given to it. therefore the damages given would havo to be commensurate with this factor. ALLEGATIONS FOUND TO BE UNTRUE. - The jury retired at 9 p.m., and ab 12.30 a.m. to-day returned answers to tho various questions put by Mr Justice Edwards. They found that the allegations contained in the letters were" 1 untrue, and that Mrs Smythe was actuated by malice. Damages £1000 wero awarded.

The Court was packed during the whole evening, and crowds waited till after midnight to receive the verdict. Mrs Patterson was congratulated on all sides upon judgment Being given.