NEWSPAPER SUED FOR LIBEL

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2197, 9 July 1914, Page 8

NEWSPAPER SUED FOR LIBEL

-. - ir ECHO OF THE COST OF LIVING % ," 4 , , COMMISSION v': CHARGES OF DISTORTED i ' ' ', * ,; E/IDENCE .*, w "' ' *'-, ' "T > ; FAIRBAIRN'V. "OTAGO DAILY :« - ' • ' TIMES" ' ■ (Br Tolwnph —Press Association) i \ , . Christchurch, Julv 8 The case, in which Andrew Fan bairn claims £1000 for alleged libel bv tho ■'"Otago Dail) Times" has opened bc- ■> ' J fore Mr Justice Sim. For the plamtift, , Sif John Fmdlay and 1 Mr Wnght ap- ", peoi,' 'for tho defendants, Messrs , .M'Gregor anil Stringer In opening tho case, Sir John Findlav ! said that*Mr 'JFanbanii at tjist refused to act on the Cost' of Liuug Comrais"bioh in 1912, but ho> consented w lien ho [ found his nanio ga7etted f A leading \ article m the "Otago Daily Times" t headed l "Faked Official Documents" | implied 'that the Commission l.ad disiti torted evidence The mere fact that [ the.report was different from 1 a news--1 v paper's report was not sufficient to base ■ a charge <f lascahtj Tho article was y' , actuated hv malice, and was unpicce- ! Rented in tho annals of the Dominion's •' ~ "journalism It showed (said counsel) l v that the writer 'was unfit for his posiI tion Plaintiff's case was tint theio f nasi no tamneiin'g, that all the official f repoits were correct / 'y. The charge of suppression rested on I statements about Reckitt's blue, alleg- \ ed tbMiave been made bv N Cuthbeit i Bourgonaud A W Jamieson, and not [ , included in tho official repoit { i Ettie 'Rout, official repoiter, said ! that Jamieson did not make the stotet,.,,,, ment before tho Commission Januef ' eon hrd coirected and 6igncd the offiI cial lepoit L-_ Dr. Hight Under) Fire. | Di.'J Hight, ,a membei of the Com--s mission, and Professor of Histoiy, and I •" Economics at Canteibuiji College, said 1,{,'., tliat he was* appointed to the Coinmis- [» J r Mon on June 7, 1912, in place of Mr l __ John Ross, of Dunedin He heaid|Mi. !■ ''" Jamieson cue his evidence;m Christ--1 church and had no recollection of a > btatement about Reckitt's Blue being ' made before the' Commission "Tell us," said Sn Johir Findlny, > "what proposal if any was ever made by the commission, to suppress any evidence?" , > , "Such a> proposal was never made," ' said the witness "No' suggestion was [ J ' /over made to 'after, modify or suppress nny report of evidence given " . ■> "Xow, specifically," said Sir John, r ' "was there any pioposal to fake, suppress, or tampei with,) Jannef son's evidence'" "No," rephcu the , witness > s "In connection with Bowyoi's or i\ any other witness's evidence'" asked » counsel fi ,r No," said witness. , t On, the second causo of action Sir , John Findlaj asked witness what ho 1 " understood by the phrase to "grind his use" , j Isn't that a question for the jury? •, suggested His Honour, and ruled ac- ' - , ooiduiglj 1 On the third cause'of action witness I said he understood the reference to mean—of tho Commission having been t' appointed to attack his competitors in f> business—to refer to Mr Fairbairn "Why?" asked Mr M'Gregor "It never occurred to mo that Falrt (I bairn as ( Commissioner was attacking f \ his business competitors," rallied witi * ncss ~> \ ' t ' "Didn't you know that he had made \ lepcated attacks on the Merchants' As- £'* ' soclatlou t" ~" ' I t "I knew he had been concorned in, f i them" t The Merchants' Association., f * i* "Didn't jou know it was suggested L. . by several of the leading' newspapers * tliat Mr M'Mirbaimv should not sit on t , the Commission 5 "/ / f "I knew it was suggesfed by ono oi , tio", , v .To Sir John Fmdlay Witness said * „ at U" ommitteo of the commission -/"- - All Furbairn offered to t resign, as Z . doc " me , nt a r i evidence fiom his firm | wouM be submitted After discussion !,' " as ummmousl} decided that Alt u / ,*■ airhairn would be lustified in remamS t ing on the commission |. ~ To Mr M'Gregor Witness agreed "-ithat a witness concerned, Mr Rowe, ' <■' ol Mr Fairbaim's firm, opened'by ,-> ' stating that his nnncipals had written t to 'the Minister stating tint the Colon- '* k :al Sugai Company and tho Merchants' Association had broken the *law by (igreeing to control the puce To the . reading of this letter objection was token by Mr M'Donald, a member of the, Commission, and wrtness said "Ho mubt have agiced with him " So tar ( Ri witness recollected, the lqttei was lot put the time", but legal odr , was" takenss and the lettei was subsequently published ' J"rhen this lepbrt"'which this letter 1 ,„j init in nas'mconect*" said Mr M'Gregor ' t sud further ,tl -\t the l"tteri {, Vicro handed mas documents, and not , aS evidence Although thej were tcni, dared as evidence - , his view was that ' th , e J. c <> u ld lie used at the discretion J, ofc tho Committee i^ fi M ' Gr<; g< >l » af'tn reading this ' Ii .' i ? skotl , Wltnc ss if ho did not ' think that the lettc made a direcs - ol'oige against the Meichants' AssoClOtlOll jAVitnes's' ag'ieed!' but ia V \ ho did not considoi that- Mi iFaubufn. had iised jus riosmoir on the Commission t ?„ l » ilK « cl'i'Ces against his opponent * JJidn t it stnko jou as bingulai that one of the Judges should insist on-his own acioimtant giving evidence against < peop/e charged with a criminal oi rtuosi- , trimiual offence-\" asked Mi M'Gregor fto , I didn't consider we were m rh o i position ot judges," icpiied Di Ilight '' )' 10 a ,e(1 Al ' RoHO to attend-' < 'Jho M.cielaiv of the Commission " Jl.uo vou an> doubt tlut'Mr FairI baun told Howe to bung those £ Jar papers o s '"I hive no ccitamtj," witness said , "111 fair John Fmdlay "Tho attitudo } of v Mi I'aiibaim had been tint of a t pijilioulail} constierftious man "

; Baiclutha Impart Company.

John E 'Ihoiupsop, manager of an , impoit company at Balclutha, said that ' there were four partners in that busii nesb—Hon. 'Ihomas Mackenzie, David l ' Mackenzio, George \i Thompson, aim himself The Hon T Mackenzie hold - oiie-qnaiter share,i but did not participate actively in the business of the > him. which had existed since 1001 It c was not true that all the purchases for 1 , the company were made from Fairbairn, t , Wright, and Co —onlj from one-eighth j to one-tenth of their purchases came f fiom them The remainder Was probably spread over ..one trundled sources No business relations existed that he j , knew of between the Hon T Mackenzie I 'ond Kairbairn, Wright, and Co Ho ' thmiftht that any such statement was f, nisn'd f"_ To Mi M'Giegor Witness said he ( " 'end his biothei Geoigo in tho film ' ' «eio liephovvs of the Hon T Mackenzie, Ii * and David Mackenzie was a son A deed of pai tnoiship nas executed in \j r 19L0, but thev'hatl.beßii operating vntlif' t nut a deed since 1001 Tho 'business ' was one of coneial merchandise 'llieu j ( dealings «itn* l 1 aiibdiru ahd "Wunht t

dated fiom 1901. Of groceries thev would supply perhaps one quartei, J Rohray and Son sunnhed the io 3 t, clnellv Witness denied tint he Jioil told Howes when he was travellii'i. foi Neill and Co that Tib could not givo him any business btcouse ihei were dealing with Fanhaiin, Wn<;ht and Co Ho also denied that the} took from Fairbairns all that thev could supplj, and got the rest elsewhere "Who provided the capital for this business 0 " asked Mr M'Gregoi "I'd lather not answei tint," said tho witness "but I can tell jou it was not all Mr Mackenzie's " "I didn't say it was," said Mi M'Gregoi Witne 9 eventually sold tint Mi Mackenzie had <piovided about half the capital' Commission Clerk Examined. John William Col'ins, Chief Clcilfof tho Industnnl Lmoiis Labom Depoiu ment, Wellington, said tint he was ap pointed cleik to the Commission in May, 1912 Mi Bern, a "Hansaid" reporter, had taken It ( vi. jer's evidence It had been leceived bacL-from him duly signed An alteiatiou in tho foim of a qucsti<!/i nut to witness by Mi Hall, a member If tho Commission, had been made about 3k v<eeks afteifßowjei gave his evidence Quoting Jiom a newspanei clipping about the r reduction of the dut.v on blue, Sir John Fmdlay asked witness if ho could find these wouls m the official repoit il " ls '°>', rophed the witness Ho fmthei added tjiint Bowjcr had nevei mado any .complaint about any onus, sions fiom his official lepoit "As clerk of the Commission," nsked \\ ii nd ;? } ' " ,VCIC iou 01 " e 'e jou' not told to suppress aiy cvidonoo '•"'— 1 ceitamly received no such m-truc-Ition, lephfd witness Jamieson's evidenco hadircached him (witness) in Auckland in that caso th<j oiigmal i had been smit to tho pimtoi He knew I ot nothing which vvouid justify the suggestion that tho Commiisiou or ai" , membeis ot it had done anxfching to rake, tamper nith, oi suppress am evidence To Mi M'Gregor Witness said that tho alteration made b} Hall had not been submitted to Bowjer Witncob claimed that in one or two eases, a (.oiiima had altered the fdnn ot soma questions, but this did not afreet the icplies of witnesses Mi M'Gregor Supposing we cstoblish the fact that icicience was made to Reckitt's blue, what will vou soj * 'I should saj that a shriithand wntci is not infallible "

'Ahy is it not mentioned m tho leport?—l should assume , that ,ho thought it was an absurd statement, owing io three halves having been men tioued. iiion jou suggest tliat the shorthand wntci exercises his discietion as to what he puts down?— "Ae I suggest that ho was endeavcunng to geiT j,l whathetmeant." Ml M'Giegoi "What ho meant I I thought a shoithand water h?d to put down what the .witness said and not what he ' Asked to explain whj newspapers had references to Reckitt's blue wnich did not appear in the official report, witness said he would prefer to rely upon the official report ( Mr JlGrgor Exacth You, like Miss Rout, J think the ofhcial repoit can't l-o ( Sn John Findla) It might he wrong, and yet not ho ' Plaintiff In the Box. Andrew lairbann, plaintiff, said that lie was asked to join tho Commission by the Prime Minister (the Hon T Mackenzie) In reply, ho sent a telegram which ho took to be a refusal The temis ot tho message wore ' Considei my personal evidence moie important Anxious to help Go; eminent m every waj " When he found that he was gazetted a member of the Commission lie considered that it vvouid havo been cow aid!j to have refused to go on No Sueps were talen to gev hm on Lhe Commission, and suggestions in that direction weie -bsoliudy false As tor the leading articlo about the suppression of evidence, theio was not a scintilla of truth mit It was uiitiuo to say that ho himself hod been instrumental in suppressing any evidence given by Bowyei, ouby Jamieson, and the imputation that the evidence had been made to fit the findings of the Commission was also untrue He knew of no case where any membei ol the Commission had instructed any suppression oi alteration ot evidence to take place , When the suggestion > about "grinding his ase" was put to the witness, he replied "I accepted a seat upon that Commission foi no other puiposo than to render a public service to the best of mj abihtv " Witness said, further, that he had nevei had anv business tiansaction v ith the Hon T Mackenzie m his life The relation between the Import Company and his firm was on the same basis as with any other of their customeis He decided, said the witness, when the Merchants' Associations the Donnmon refused to give evidence, that ceitiin evidence he had in his possession should Do giv en in tho public mteiests Ho ofteied to lotno fiom tho Commission, hut its members decided that an emplovce could be subpoenaed to give the nccessar> evidence He was not conscious, further, of any action on 1/is port tint could ho thought," on abuse of his position on the Commission''' To Air J\l.|Grcgoi Witness said tint in 1910 his' firm consisted of himself, Wnght, Ma nice Louisson, and Alfred Louisson Jlecontlv Wright had retired Touching on the Mei chants' Associotion, wiFness r said he had nothing to do with it, so long as it did not liiteifero w ltli him, and attempt to get illegal advantagos Do thev attenmt o—"Most0 —"Most decidedlv " Since when ? —"Apnl 1,1911 " " ■- "Reckitt's Blue"

Witness fuithcr stated that when he found the Commercial Ti lists Act in opeiation he. refused to join the Merciiints' Association, as it gave, he considered, illegal advantages to tho membcis compiismg it Thereupon a fght ensued between tile Association and his firm

"I suggest that Mr. Faiibaun went on the Commission toi the pmposo of helping his business," said Hi M'Giogor in tho couise of an exchange with bu John Fnullaj. "I did notlnnft of the kind," sud Mr Fairbaun "My business stifleicd to .1 gieat extent, and acinnonious coiocomicd with firms in Eui'opo and cksewliere." Asked win he had been appointed, witness said ho could not s.ij He was, howo\er, known to three members of Cabinet, and with two of tlicm', Mr Geo Liurcnson and Mi Buxton, he had had business tiansaetions " ' "Absolute falsity," said Mi. Fairbaun to the suggestion bj Mi M'Gicgoi that the Hon T Blackcn/io had suaranteed Mi. Faiibaim on starting Ins business. Ho had known Mr Mackenzie pcrsonallj only since 1910 Mi M'Giegoi Did >ou hcai Bowser mention Bcckitt's Blue?—"I can't saj —lidon't iccollect." Witness lomombci"i\ a letter b\ Godfiey m "The Press" after the publication of the findings of the Commission, m which Godfiey said he diew attention to the 'statement made b-\ witness that remission ot the duty of twopence pe'r pound had been made, which was incorrect, as onlj one penny had been remitted. .He had taken legal opinion: about that letter i "Oh," said Mr. M Gregoi "So jon aie jnsl hmg biiek njiriil<r to bung actions a«amst Ihc 'Pi ess* and the rimes'.'"'—"l don't s.n <.o, ' slid witness. V i ■:-.-. Tlio Couit then adjourned