A LIBELLOUS SHEET.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1827, 13 August 1913, Page 7

A LIBELLOUS SHEET.

JJY LABOUR FEDERATION. JURY FINDS. FOR £500 DAMAGES, Auckland, August 12. The publication of a pamphlet entitled "Tho Tragic Story o£ flio Waihi Strike" lias resulted in a claim lor •£IOOO damages for alleged libel. Tho case was heard by Mr. Justice Cooper at tho Supreme Court to-day. The plaintill was Thomas Walsh, of Auckland, and the defendant tho New Zealand Federation of Labour. Mr. ,1. Jl, Heed, . K.C., with, him Mr. Newton, appeared ' for Walsh, ami Mr. I'. J, O'lteguii lor tlio Federation of Labour. The alleged libellous words complained 1 of in the pamphlet included the fol' lowing:— It is to be emphasised a;nd recorded for ,tlie consolation of every turning down professor and Labour parasite in New Zealand 'Jud the Sydney Trades Councillor, that the so-called Engine Drivers' Union, lor which they fought, and whose apostasy they applauded, volunteered lor tcabbery before the re-opening of the mines, and, later oil, was at work in Wailu whilo thousands were on strike. There is no plainer instance of scabbcry in all its rotten chronicles. In tho ranks of tho Labour party wero two notorious strike-breaking advocates and organisers (\V. I*. Black and T. Walsh), not then repudiated by the party nor expelled from it. These two stood convicted, and their colleagues stood craven. Plaintiff was further described as all "organiser of scabs, and a person who had glorified the police ami employers and befouled tho strikers." It was Alleged that, in consequence of thesp words, • plaintiff 'had been greatly injured in credit and reputation. Tho defence denied that tho words had been published falsely and maliciously, or that they were capable of any defamatory meaning. Tho words .were mado by way of fair comment, wero fair expressions of opinion on matters of public interest, ami were made by way of reply to j statements in the "Voice of Labour." , '■ After n retirement of over an hour the jury brought in a verdict for XliOO damage's, and judgment was oniercd accordingly, with costs on tho middle soa-le. Mr. O'Kcg'an applied that there should bo a new trial on tho grounds that tho Judge had misdirected the jury bv liondirection. 'When Mr. Heed was addressing- the Court he (Mr. O'liegan) had objected lo the reading of certain papers. His Honour had mid that he'would direct tho jury not to take the articles in thoso papers into consideration when considering the amount: of damages, if any. However, when summing-up, his Honour had omitted to do-this.-. His Honour said that he tliought that the indication of his intention was sufficient.. However, lie would send tho jury back so that no injustice might bo done. The foreman of tho jury assured his Honour that they did not consider tho articles at all. .. His Honour (to 'Mr. O'Regaii): It is useless to move non-direction after that. Mr. O'Rcgan: That is so.