RONALD-HARPER CASE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1779, 18 June 1913, Page 7

RONALD-HARPER CASE.

PLAINTIFFS APPEAL DISMISSED. Bt Teleararh- -Pisis Asaoofatios—Oonyright Melbourne, June 17. The Rev. James Ronald recently commenced an action in the Supreme Court against Mr. Robert Harper for .£IO,OOO damages, on the ground that Harper in an action in 1909 obtained a verdict by fraud. This action, on Harper's application, was set aside on the ground that it was frivolous and vexatious. Ronald appealed against this decision. Tho State Full Court has dismissed the appeal with costs. The Ronald-Harper case began with-' m libel action in 1900, in which Mr. Robert Harper, a well-known Melbourne merchant and a member of the Federal Parliament, was tho defendant, and tho Rev. J. B. Ronald, formerly a member of tho Labour party in the Federal House of Representatives, was the prosecutor. Mr. Ronald claimed .£3OOO damages, and set out in his statement of claim that tho alleged slander was uttered by defendant at the Presbyterian Church, Toorak, in presence of Frederick Stocks, and that the words complained of were: "I have rebuked Ronald at Parliament House for low or improper or bad language, and also I have heard it stated at Parliament House that some of his colleagues of tho Labour party disapproved of his conduct, and that some of them had gone so far as to reprove Mr. Ronald for using improper language." The alleged libel was written by defendant and sent to ther uimmittee of tho Presbytery of Melbourno South, in November, 1907. Tho defence, as amended, was, that if the words alleged were uttered or written, they were used on privileged occasions, and without malice, and were confidential and substantially true. It was also set out in justification that on different occasions plaintiff had told Improper stories and used improper language. The jury found for the defendant. In the following year Robert Harper, W. C. Harper, P. Hill, J. Huxley, W. Kemp, and W. Brocket wero tried iji tho Criminal Court on charges of conspiracy. In opening tho case for the Crown, Mr. Purves said it was contended that Hill was employed by Robert Harpor to collect ovidenco supporting a plea of justification which had been set up by the defendant during the course of the Ronald v. Harper libel action. It might bo possible for R. Harper to prove that he believed Hill was an honest man. But evidence would bo forthcoming against such a belief. There could bo no question of mistake. It was as a matter of deliberate purpose that Hill had set out practically to ruin Mr. Ronnkl by procuring witnesses who would swear diabolical falsehoods against him. Tho trial ended in the conviction of Hill and tho discharge of the other accused. A series of subordination and perjnry cliarget were also heard in connection with tho case.