'GREAT MEN IN SMALL PLACES'

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1805, 18 July 1913, Page 5

'GREAT MEN IN SMALL PLACES'

LIBEL CASE & AFTEH. PLEASANTRIES AT OHAKUNE. "The whole story is a typical illustration of the snialluess of great men in email places," began Mr. C. P. Skerrett, in an Appeal Court case which was heard yesterday. "It is," he continued, "the •usual story of the bickerings at parish meetings and petty quarrels at a couple of social gatherings, unredeemed by the slightest trace of anything like broadmindedness.'' The case was an Ohakune affair, and the parties to it were the local postmaster (William Canning) and a local land agent (Alexander Herbert .Wilkie). Differences arose between them, and, some' little time ago, Wilkie sued Canning for libel. • The libel was stated to lie in the following paragraph in a letter which TVilkie'sent to the secretary cf the General Post Office, Wellington "A police raid was made about two months ago on the premises of a Chinaman, Ah Duck King, a convicted sly grog-seller. Some liquor was seized by the polioe, and when giving evidence in open Court when "the case was tried, the Chinaman stated on oath that he had received the whisky from Mr. Canning. As a resident of the district,'therefore, I respectfully submit .that an explanation should be made in connection with .' this matter." Canning claimed .£505 damages, and a jury awarded him .£250. Against this finding Wilkie now appealed. He was represented in the case by Mr. C. P. Sker•rett, K.C., of Wellington, and Mr. C. E. Mackay. of Wanganui. Sir. John Findlay, K.C., of Wellington, and Mr. A. H. Gould, of Ohakune, appeared for Canning. On the Bench were his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), and his Honour Mr. Justice Chapman. Continuing his outline of the .case, Mr. Skerrett said that Canning was the postmaster at Ohakune, and Wilkie,. who, also, was a resident of that town,'was 'V Justice of. the Peace, a land agent, and 6omewhat of a busy-body." Both were members of -the same church, and they attended the local -parish meetings and_ socials. The story'of the case commenced with a row at a meeting of parishioners, and that row concerned the election of a vestryman. Wilkie; announced that he would be pleased to nie'et Canning "in the open," they did not' speak to each other whenever they, met in the street, and generally they were "friends no more." At a subsequent social gathering there was a inix-up of coats in the cloak-room, and this led to another conflict between the parties. Ohakune was in a prohibited area, and in the .town, there was a Chinese storekeeper named Ah Duck King.. The postmaster had borrowed a bottlo 'whisky, from the Chinaman, and gave .on© in. Teturn tim© before the raid referred to in Wilkie s Mr." Skerrett contended that the finding which ■ had been recorded against Wilkie should be set aside. .-{He argued that the paragraph in question was not libellous, and did not affect Canning s position as a postmaster. .; , After Sir John "RridlayShad.' addressed •the Court with reference to the .law .on the subject, their Honours announced that they would take time to consider the matter. .' "•' ' 1 '