LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 680, 3 December 1909, Page 11

LAW REPORTS.

.SUPREME COURT. BUSINESS MAN SLANDERS A RIVAL. 4.W4R3 OF .£75 An action for .£5Ol damages for alleged slander was heard in tho Supremo Court yesterday before Mr Justice Chapman and a common jury of Uehe The paities were George Lincoln Cole, wholesale hat and cap manufacturer, of Wellington (plaintiff), and Stephen Peter Hoyn?, wholesale hat and cap manufacturer, of Wellington (plaintiff) Mr C 1? 'Skerr.ett, KC J with him Mr D Jackson, nppeared for plaintiff, and Mr T M Wllford. instructed by Mr. F, E, Potheiick, for defendant , The Words Compained of. Colo claimed that on or ibout August G last 1 Heyns falsely and maliciously epoko of his business to ono Vera Constance (Dverond, one of Cole's emplojees, in tho following mannor "I have been through Mr. Cole's books, and ha can't possibly last more, than three- months " It iias alleged that Colo had consequontlj b«n injured in his credit and i epilation, and had also lost the services of experienced employees, \\><o l<ad been induced bj Iloyns's words, to leave his sorvice and pntefi that of his rival Bj leason of lm inabilitj ,to pro otire other experienced asvstailts, plaintiff had been prevented from darrjing on his business, and he further alleged that he had been greatlj hindered in the execution of his business contracts,' and the delivery of goods manufactured bj'vhim, and had consequently suffered much damage in his business connection. He, therefore, claimed damageb'Tis stated The defence i<, as a denial of publication o£ the words, and of any loss or injury to Cole's business As a second defence, it was alleged that, if the words were spoken, which was denied, the occasion ivas a priuleged one, and the words were used without malico, and at a time when Hcjns and Miss Overend had a direct interest in the ihfoiniation then given, How tho Slander Occurred. ' Mr.'Skerrett said that, unless he had been mismstructed, tho jury would find that tho *ords had been used "in cold blood, not in a 1 burst of temper, and the evidence, would further show that they had been spoken by Heyns to damago Cole, and that their *nce was a betrayal of confidence /Vera Constance Overend, of I\aiwarra, elated in evidence that she had been a capmaker in Colo's Umploy tor 21 years, and she had got on very well with him In Au Kust, work becamo slack, and i>he, with others, was put off work, and told that slip woula bo sent for when wanted. While unemployed, eho recened a letter from Messrs. Brooks and Co,, laud; agents, of Boulcott Street, and went *ith mother to the office, where they had on interview with Heyns Tho latter said that te was starting in the cap-making business and that he had been going into partnership with Cole. Hβ informed her that he had seen Cole's books and knew, tho state of his affairs, and that Colo could not possibly last more than three months Hejns, asked.what, salary she had been getting, and when she told him ho said that ho knew. No arrangement regard in(f wages was made, but she agreed to com inence work for Heyns right awny HeyM said that ho had offered to buv Cole out for .£4OO, but that tho latter wanted Hejns asted witness to see Miis Jl'Cleary, a fellowworker at Colo's, to tell hor about tho enguge mimt, and to ask her to call on him (Heyus) at Brooks and Co.'s office, with a view to receiving employment. "Witness 4aid that she was lnducld to leave Cole's employment by what defendant told hor and would not have Ifeft but for that lnformatibn Sho commenced in 'defendant's employ on August 12, receiving her old -n age—Xl per week—an 4 remained in his service for three weeks. 1 To Mr. Wilford She was now forewoman at Cole's factory, receiving 30s per weoL Be ,fore tho interview with Heyns, she had been told by Miss M'Clearjr that J Col9 l ,vas,J'ahak} " Eliza iLMflcll, mother of tho prouous 'wit ness, also described the interview at Brook&'s Horace John Hamlyn Pickering, commeicial. traveller,, said 'that, in August, lie applied for I a position with Hejni, who said ithat the only i opposition would be-that l otiCole s|lle told | witness further that li 6 knou Cole's position, and that he was "on his last legs" Witness yiAi authorised by Heyns to inform customers that HeyD/s , prices were 25 l per cent loner than those quoted by Cole, who would soon bo "worked oft." Witness was, nou in Cole'a eoiploj. < Evidence, Defence, and Cross-Exammation. Cole, tho plaintiff, stated'that ho had been cai'rying on business at 272 Victona bticot, Heyns nad negotiated with him to puichase a half share in the buiiutsa Witnet>3 coneidtaed tnat Hojns v,ass a smart business man, and the terms proposed wcie JIOO lor i halt bhiirc, Colo to take £20 por month, and Hoyns XLJ Alter consulting au old business inuud, witness decided not to go through with the proposal, and Hejns latei miormod him that he ,, had bought into another him 'J. ho net proht of witness's business last jear was JWi'J, including drawings As a lesult of tbo absence of his employee, who had gone over to Heyns, his business was disorganised, and a number of orders wero fate delivered No offci pi an apology or compensation had been made by Heyns tfis business ( had received a sovero Evidence given for the detente was to the Effect that Cole's business not as pisopei■ms as had been stated Heyns, in tho course of his evidence, said that ho had been m New Zealand for a iew months only, and, sincohis arrival, ho had been engaged as cap,,corset, and clothing manufacturer, and share buyei He had not been successful in any of tho«e enterprises. Ho did not offer .£IOO for n half share in Colo's business, nnd he saw that the balanto of assets over liabilities was only about Cross examined by Sir Skcrrctt, Hejna stated that he had negotiated to purchase a share of the business but ho made no olfei, He dpmed having said that Colo was "on his last legs Mr. bkerrett Didn't yon think it Was a mean tnck to write to this woman (Miss Overend) to try and filch her from Cole'—"No" Would jou hare done it if Colo had not been *wavr — Yes. And yon would dp it again, unless you had a lesson '—"I would do it ngam " Mr. Wilford The yonng lady told you that Bhfe was out of work, and that there was no

uuie iixui ior iicr returning■'—'Vies ■'■'■' ■ Further "iftcncp for the defence'was:;given by Ruby M'Cleary, Bernard (of Brook, f £ nt l i dlvn , nl B «™« MVJBrookes'J'an.l ! V.& &&" o^n ?.^Frederick After an liotiA dehberahonpthe 'jury' ref turned at 645 o'clock, with a" verdict or-the t plaintiff of .£,5 damages Costs>werf-flowed f together mth junior counselVvfeeV-witnesW expenses, and disbursements ■S^-v^'i r:" ' CHINESE AS FREEHj^DESs^i' '' * ; The boundary dispute, whicn' f wj»s m -van Ohakune case before the-'Supreme^ourt if , last week, was decided by Wγ.:Justice Edwards gestorday morning. Tho Commercial-Agency Company, Ltd , assignee ■ of r-Joseph ;aW| Fletcher, storekeeper of Raetih;, 'had taken t proceedings against Chan Yin and •Ah ■' Duck f King, storekeepers, of Ohakune.Vfo/: tho ire- ' coyery of tho puichaee money? of^section. i Mr. Von Haast appeared for.* theplaintiff i company, and Mr.,Beero for;.-Atf Duck Kin?. * His Honour , , in delivering judgment, sliid that all but one question had been discussed and deeded at the hearing, and it now remained ' {or i}, ln } P det «™» n e whether defendants were ' entitled to compensation in rwpect of a deficiency of 3ft. 3in. in frontage. His Honour \ did not consider that any compensation was duo as far as the,frontngo Viis'concerned, but f defendants uere entitled to»c"ompcnsation for * pno foot of laud, which, by innocent error, had been transfened to tho adjoining property j after the agreement for sale had been made. { H the parties failed to oerco upon an amount, * tho compensation, would be fixed by the regie! f trnr, Plaintiff ltonld bo allowed benty ™- f seas cost* and witnesses' expenses. Leave to I »pply was reserved. • ■ Jj ' IDENTIFICATION FOR DIVOBCE. I In tho divorce caee, Edwin Hubbard v. Elira i Etitibard, mentioned last neetc.Mr. Justice lid's wards deoMed appoint yesterday, regarding the ' manner pf tie .petition upon tho ro- ' ,«pondcnt and'fhe co-respondent, T.he affidavit I of service set ous that the persons served in j. England hod ,admitfed that they were tho pori eons named in ,the iPftjtion/ Hle-llononr held i that Hifs Wits imi <uuicienHd«ntincAtlon of tho parties,* ah(inha,t faimotning further would b6 \ lertufred (o, (dentlfy >tliert * |t The 0a66 flas,ad]oarn<!d eino die, ia older i that si!ffiotefit_j2roof imijht be obtained that i tlio proper < persons jmd bdeh served Mr i O'Leary appeared for th 6 petitioner.