TWO CLAIMS FOR LIBEL.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1844, 2 September 1913, Page 6

TWO CLAIMS FOR LIBEL.

DAMAGES IN BOTH OASES. (Br TdesrnDh—Prcse Association.) Ciiristcliurcli, September 1. At tho Supreme Court to-day, before a common jury of twelve, an action by John- Alexander Newell against tho "Lvttelton Times" Company was heard. Plaintiff claimed 1 £1000 damages for libel arising out of an articlo publislic_d in tho Christcihurch "Star" of May 1", reflecting oil plaintiff in. his capacity as gaol surgeon. Tho statement of dcfonco admitted that the statements in the article wore untrue, but pleaded that tho publication of an apology bad been offered together with £100, which plaintiff 'bad' refused'. Defendants had brought £100 into Court as sufficient to satisfy the claim, 'flic jury retired lor thirty minutes, and, on_ rcta'ning, announced a verdict for plaintiff with £300 damages. Judgment with costs as per scalc was en tore;] accordingly, hut costs for second counsel were not allowed. Another action-p-Alcxaaidor Adair Johnston v. the "Lyttellon Times" Co. —was heard before a common jury of twelve. Plaintiff claimed £1000 damages for a libel contained in a. letter written by a correspondent to the editor of tlio "Lyttc.Uon Times," and published in that newspaper on June 29. The stat<»memt of claim set out that plaintiff was a Fellow of iho Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, and that, as a result-of criticisms of animals in the homo maintained by tlio Sccicty for the Prevention , of Cruelty to Animals, lie topic over tho management under conditions. The arrangement under which he was to control the homo was published in tho "Lyttelton Times," and, _ later, a letter signed "Veritas" was published, stating that clogs wore destroyed ,at the home by means of strychninc. Plaintiff said that, the statements contained in the letter implied that ho had wantonlv and cmielly destroyed tlve dogs, and that ho was guilty of culpable ignorance m the exorcise of has professional ditties. Tlio statement of defence was that the defendant company hatl oflered to publisii an apologv and to pay .his costs, and that tlio letter had been published without any mplico or attempt to c.o injury. After a retirement of fifty minutes tho jurv returned with a verdict awarding plaintiff £10 damages. Judgment was entered accordingly -wit-h costs.