MEANING OF CARTOON.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1179, 14 July 1911, Page 2

MEANING OF CARTOON.

MR. MASSEY'S APPEAL. FURTHER ARGUMENT IN COURT. Argument in the appeal of William Ferguson Jlnsspy, ill tiio cn.-e of Massey v. "New Zealand Times," was concluded vC'Merday, in (ho Court of Appeal, with liis Honour Sir .loshna Williams m'fsidiiiß. and .Mr. Justice Dcnniston, Mr. Justice Edwards, and Mr. Justice Sim, with him «n flic Bunch. Mr. H. I), lldl, K.C., wilh him Mr. A. (.irny, appeared for the appellant; Mr. S. Solomon," K.C., with him Jlr. A. \V. Ulair, lor (ho respondent. 1 n the orkinal Supreme Court c-ass \V. l'V Mnssey, M.J , ., chimed £2000 from the defendant company in respect of an alleged libellous cartoon, which was said to mean that plaintiff was responsible for tho free distribution of an improper and scurrilous pamphlet, reflecting upon the Prime Minister, or had taken part in (he frco distribution thereof, and that the plaintill' was a liar. PlnjntilF lost the case, and applied for n re-trial. This was refused by the Chief' Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Mr. Justice Chapman, and the appeal was against their judgment. Argument began on Tuesday afternoon and was not concluded until 3 p.m. yesterday. Mr. Solomon, continuing his argument yesterday morning, contended at some length that the evidence elicited by him in cross-examination and objected "to by the appellant, was admissible, because it was relevant and necessary for the purpose of showing the unreliability of certain witnesses on points they had referred, to, and that such evidence could not do. any injustice. Counsel proceeded next to tho question of misdirection, under which had lie' submitted, inter alia, that a libel on a class could only bo a libel on an individual also, if it necessarily followed that, because the class was referral (0, M'go, the individual was referred to. Thus, if it were said that all the lawyers in Wellington were dishonest, that would be a libel on each onu of them, but if it were said that lawyers were liars, that would not be a libel on anv individual. Sir Josh->a Williams: If ihero is a libel on a das; and the figure represents Mr Massey a.« ,ne of the class, that is a libel on Mr. Mussey. ; Mr. Justice Denniston: Especially if he 13 the only one there. On another point, a little later, Mr Justice Dennistou expressed the view that it ' were shown that a certain publica-•..l.-11, however innocently iutoudc-d, appeared to B, C, D, and E, and perhaps half a dozen others, to be injurious to somebody, then it would bo libellous, though it might not so annear to A. .Mr. holomon strongly controverted this v«w. insisting that libel or no libel was wholly and solely a matter for the opinion of the.jury. After further exchanges between Bench and Bar the point was left, apparently without his Honour and counsel iiuding any common ground. Mr. Solomon further submitted that 1111 loss tho Court held that the only possible moaning- of tho cartoon was what Uμ plaintiff contended, it would be the duty of the Court to uphold the verdict. Ije suggested that the true meaning was that which was indicated in the same papers article of December I—namely, Hint ho-did not discountenance the pamphlet after it was distributed. Counsel also laid stress upon tho presence in Hl3 cartoon of other bundles besides the pamphlets, such as "Blackening Dead Mens Characters," "Mud," etc. The statement of. claim ignored these things Counsel suggested that these things could only refer to tho efforts of tho Opposition in the House, and that it might well be inferred that the other parts of tho cartoon had merely tho.same kind of political significance. Why did Mr. Massey select one part only? Mr. iipll said it only showed that his client did not caro what the other side said lintil they accused him in connection with the "Black" pamphlet, and that forced him into Court.'

Mr. .Solomon said lie could not accept that.. ■ ■

Mr. Justice Edwards suggested that the. cartoon, taken .with the papor's editorial article of December 1, meant that Mr. Jlassey hail been carting and distributing the pamjililots about the country from the North Capo to the Bluff. Mr. Justice Dcnniston: Where was the donkey taking the things? To the House? Ho must have been taking them somewhere. Mr. Massey says that he was acensed of carting them - about, and that he did not cart them about. Mr. Solomon: If that is your Honour's vie,*in , . Justice Denniston: No. I nm putting it lo you as a suggestion. My view is a thing I have yet to come to. I now only suggest that ■ Mr. Massey was drawn as carting those things about. Mr. Solomon, in conclusion, said the main issue was: The plaintiff said the cartoon meant that he, or ho with others, was responsible for ttio free distribution of the pamnhlet; it might l>e that that was what (he jury could have found, but it was not what they did find, and he submitted, for the reasons he had Riven, that it was impossible to say it was proved to demonstration th.it the cartoon did really mean what (he plaintiff snid it lnMiit. Mr. Blair, in the course of his address, cited authorities relating to defective findings, and argued that there was no doubt that the jury intended a verdict for tlio defendant, and that it wns a to which reasonable men might come. Judgment was reserved.