LABOUR MEN DIFFER.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 983, 25 November 1910, Page 7

LABOUR MEN DIFFER.

A LIBEL ACTIONAMUSING PASSAGES IN COURT. MR. E. J. CAREY, PLAINTIFF. : 'A. 'libel' action ..of 'considerable interest ' iri : connection' with .the "organised Labour "mbvement was heard in the Supremo - Court.yesterday by tlie Chief Justice (Sir - Robert Stout), . . -.. Elijah John"''Carej 1 , president of' the .Wellington Trades a:nd Labour Council, • f secretary'of t:ho'Wellington Cooks' and' >/'.'Waiters .Union, 'Wellington- Grocers' ■ Union, and. New Zealand Hotel and . Restaurant ■ ' Union, proceeded against-William : Pierrepbnt Black, of -'.Auckland,, printer, publisher, and pro-' •, prictor of a' paper called the ."New Zea- . land Leader." The'alleged libel consisted of a long '."..article' published ■ in. tho defendant's : paper on September .2, 1910, headed -. .'lying Labour .Traitor. . Carey, Wants a . 'Government Job.. Repudiates New Zea- . land-Federation of. Labour." It was , claimed that tho defendant meant by this article that tho plaintiff Was. a liar, .traitor, and impostor, and. was not fit to . ;'oceupy any position of trust, or any. office :in: a, Labour , organisation. ,-In, conse- . iquenco of this, it Was alleged that plain- '. ". !ti.tf had.been greatly injured in credit and Ho asked, for damages, and .an injunction,to restrain : defendant ■;;. from repeating the. alleged offence.'. .' ,: The/defence,- as- filed, was-on'-tlie;.in'o- . , fold founds: of truth and fair comment. . ;Mr.'A. W.-,Blair (in of.Mr. M. Findlay, who is .unwell). appeared . .for, the plaintiff. Defendant, who proved ' : Ito' "be. a ;yoluble and sometimes amusing .conducted, his;own case. ■A" - In.-.opening the case,'. Mr.'.Blair 6aid itha . defendant's newspaper .'circulated . -~ New Zealand, and particularly ' , among- those interested in' Labour qucs- • tioiis, such being the people with whom the plaintiff was connected. Tho libel . .was a very.gross one, and the evidence .would - show- that if half -of .what was alleged in. it Was true, (he plaintiff was . quit® unfit to. hold his official positions. ;HiS income was derived solely from .his • .'secretarial wqrk for' several',unions, . and "'from, a small ; weekly . remuneration for -.iDews'paper .contributions. .These .official: ; .-[positions depended on .the votes of tho -. "members of the unions, and it was there- '•- fore of the. highest itnportance to* plain- . tiff to havo tie confidence' of his fellowKforkcrs, v" ~ ;■ : Mr.,Tregear In the Witness Box. Edward -' Tregear,'. Secretary of . tho .5 ; labour' Department, said he'liad read-the ■ . ; article. complained of. Mr. BJair.fAYhat impression about Mr/ jCarey did it leave mind?—"Pret : cisely r tho inipri»sion'l had before." . His Honour : ■ The article, didn't affect jou at all?—" Just so." .. Blair:-If it was taken as "true, < .'twould* it' : affect tho plaintiff's position in . ' IthQ Labour' world?—"lf it was true of -. lanyone,. I'would like-to see him hanged , .ito,a lamp-post." '■■ . ' - •* ■ 'Did. you -know. anything of the previous :_ ' history of tho matter ''"—"Generally, yes." ' .. the. defendant: He'lmew tho unions .. .jgenerally,; and was: in touch With the v 'leaders.- Ho did not'attend the meetings. }!: - Defendant: AVhen a, case is .before a •' Court of-law a man who comments on it -is'guilty of; contempt of Court. > Now, what would you-think of a man who,-. • while a strike is on, rushes into print and ....writes, an article, opposed, to labour from every, point of yiew? • -. His Honour:'-But,, you see, a strike is , not beforo a Court. ..' Defendant:, But it'is before a moral. Court.- • • . r'-- -His:> Honour: Your idea would' mean' ' -■. •that'as eoon as.a man" has done anything g - nobody must comm'cnt.'ou it; Until when? ■: -.Tho Day of Judgment?. .1 don't see why ■ . a'man' should : loso Jiis liberty . of- speech' ■{- '.'bocailso- a-strike is, going' ony. any.. more .than ,in case'-of-a.'Wiir. ■ : . , On-.the/question vboing put. again, witness- said, that .sDeaking :: unofficially'., he " -thought ho ivoufd claim-the liber% .of: .' ;; ; commehtiiig. whetKer.; a' strike ivnsjji.pro- . gress.or-Bofc. .• rs,;,s-; A Labour M.P. . .. -■'r- David" M'Laren'i r,M-.P., Labour - organ- I j fser, said he 'had 'read- the Article com- ' of,' and-tliought that if only a - y • -modicum of the .charges .were truo tho,:; : 4|'- plaintiff- would', be' unfit to .hold his.pro•' , -eent official positions. : - i -r. Cross-examined by' .defendant, the wit- 1 [■. ness said Jie ..did not,-'remember reading i . an-article in-the "EveningiPosf? of. De- i i,- oember-1,- 1909,signed.'TJnibuist,"' and ! . dealing with, the strike" at tho State coal mines. . ■■,'•_' )■-. ' ■■ ' ....:. Defendant; explained'-',that the "Leader" atticlo in^-r its. allusion:-to! tho article in the -"Post", .mentioned'the • Blackball- ', .strike; in mistake .for; the strike'at the .-...State-coal mine at Po"int : Elizabeth; He. ■t. i -was away- when the- article appeared. "In Courteous Language." -. : Defendant,, who, lia'd.' rather' the man-' ::".; ner ; of, an, open-Sir orator than a crossv examining.', counsel, , next alluded to an : ' interview .with the plaintiff in the Aiick- ,? .land "Herald" of August 29, and do- '/■ clared," "Instead 1 of writing in, a Labour ■'"-.paper, they.write.in in' Opposition paper, ."•' where they c'a.n'sling", mud." . ■.-, .. His.Honour'": You. mnst":pni!"yonr".jjnes-.'•:tions-more. ' , ; . ■.''•■:■-v.. Defendant: >1. will,..as -Mr. - .M'Laren ' . seems to have a short memory. - (Laugh- " - Havo you ever gone.'ori a platform and : n sajdra' man' was lietrayirig " the cause of Labour?—" Yes, in .courteous language."' •, His Honour: ■ You forget the witness's i 'nationality. (Laughter.) •. • ;i, : -JohriThomas' sev- .■ ' eral labour organisations with "which; he '*.- : was connected,. Ho had read' the, article. . . If it was true, Mr.. Carey would be a dis- - grace.to any movement. >. .'■-' ■" ■. ■ His Honour: Is it necessary, to, call'this sort of evidence? Can't I understand-the j -English language 1 without your calling • experts? ■ •' - . ;■:"' •, :-V - "Are You a Socialist?" ;L;,,.;Mr.-Blair: Would the defendant like to ■ : '.'cross-examine Mr. Carey? , , Defendant: Oh, yes,-I would! ;; ; ' Mr. Blair . then called.: the plaintiff, 1 tasked. ,him a couple of formal questions, . >and sat down. ' • . i.». .Defendant: Have you had'any personal with-.me? . . . - ', •-. Plaintiff: Yes, unfortunately. ■ ' Defendant: Unfortunately for me, too. - Can you givo any reason why I should bear malice to you ? : ' ; ■ Plaintiff: I should put it down to a ■ distorted miniL Defendant: Don't judge.-by' : :your own jnind, Mr. Carey. Are you a Socialist? Plaintiff: Yes. His Honour said ho did,not knpw what that,had.to do,with tho case. There were .Socialists and Socialists, and' there were as great differences between' them as thero -were between individualists. 1 Defendant: There is only one kind of [barrister and solicitor, your Honour. His Honour: Oil,, no.. There arc dozens ~ nf types. . , .Defendant: ;-If I tell you'the Socialists ■/are. out to nationalise the .'land and tools - ;. .of production would you contradict that = . Paintiff. They, would ' contradict it .themselves. They would'say that they , iflro .out to socialise them. Defendant: Ah, you are slippery! : ... His 1 Honour asked tho defendant" to ' •" .confine himself to questions about' Mr . Carey's' actions. , "A Labour of Love," '' Defondant then inquired' "about 1 the . (plaintiff's past and present income. - His Honour again' interposed. Mr. Carey said he had. no objection to answer. "When working as a waiter, he earned <£10 to .012' a week, but'lost his position, because ho took a prominent . part in. tho Labour movement. His . income, as a* trade union secretary was about-,£-1 ss. per week,- Ho had, in somo ii'nstances, declined payment for conductling cases before the. Arbitration Court. His It doesn't sliow that ho Ywas an. impostor becauso he was paid ■ ifor his .work. Defendant: I want ,to show why ho Temains in the movemerit. His Honour: But you don't suggest ..'that sccretarios. should hot be paid? Per"haps the unions should get their newspapers free? (Laughter.) ■' Defendant (to plaintiff): Then you are . .in it for love? Plaintiff: It is a labour of love. I hare %wice -refused a rise. f'Dreams' of Class-Conscious Revolution." - Plaintiff further stated that the interview : jvhich had appeared in tho Auck- ■ ' land'"Herald," and which defendant had complained about, was given by him in a-

Dominion representative, and was telegraphed to .Auckland.. Plaintiff, in tlie interview,' uphold the trade union method of political action as against tho "organised revolution" favoured by tho. Miners' Federation Conference then sitting in H'ellington. In the further course of mingled crossexamination, i and altercation; and'judicial interposition; -, tho plaintiff's . reported words (refer Ping to. tho Miners' Federation Conference)—"tho spokesmen then wandered into dreams of class-conscious revolution"—were much bandied to and fro, but little or nothing bearing directly upon the alleged, libel :was elicited. No further' evidence was called for the plaintiff. " . ._ The Defence. ' George' Grey' Farland, .secretary of .tho Wellington Wharf Labourers' Union;' was tlie only-witness called by the defendant. Ho said he protested ..against plaintiff's' attitude at tht Trades and Labour Con-' ferenco in Auckland, but;-he would- probably not have.'done ■ so. had', he beenfully,aware of the rules. »;.y : . Tho-defendant,' in.-his address',-asked. tho Court to consider, tho matter in its relation' to ■ the Socialist movement: • Jlo also submitted that tho.use of such .words as "liar" and "traitor" was to, ,bo expected in a Labour paper, in view'of the class of rcaderS"for which',,it was, mainly intended.. ■- ■~ . His Honour adjourned the case' Until 10 a.m. to-day. -v. ~ ;