ALLEGED LIBEL

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 6, 2 October 1920, Page 7

ALLEGED LIBEL

watersiders' Claim damages.

, Br TeleKrarh—Press Association. . • Auckland, October 1. A libel action was begun at the Supreme Court this morning before Mr Justice Salmond. • Tho plaintiffs are Henry Green and John Meikle.: wharf labourers, Auckland, and are each claiming ilflflO from the New Zealand Watersub Workers'- Federation, JaniQs Roberts, of Wellington, -general secretary of tno federation, and, the "Maorilaiid Worker Printing and Publishing Company, Limited, • Wellington. Mr. T. J. Fleming appeared for plaintiffs, and Sir John Findlay, K.C., and mi kahili' for tho defendants. The " made by plaintiffs in their claim were that certain statements published by. the defendants in tie report of the federation's fifth annual tonfcrenw at Napier, in December, 1919, contained V words, which, taken as a-whole, •Wero" used deliberately for the' purpose of arousing' against' the plaintiffs the hatred and contempt and ridicule of the members of the defendant, association, and'of all New Zealand unionists. They alleged that tho words were understood to mean that the plaintiffs had from a spirit of meanness and militancy brought an improper action against the defendant association, that they wero ■ bad unionists whoso names should be • recorded so that ' cnown to all trade unions that they acted meanly, that they were' disseminators of revolutionary doctrines dangerous to the State and to trado unionism, a nd that they were contemptible persons of bad character, traitors, who would betray the business secrets of the association, and that in conjunction with another man, they were .upsetting the waterfront at Auckland. Plaintiffs claimed that they had, therefore, been injured in their credit and reputation, an:} had > become victims of the hatred and ill-will of members of tho defendant association, who had rofused to work with them, with the result .that they were prevented from following their iisual calling as wliavf labourers. In addition to each claiming plaintiffs asked tor -an injunction restraining tho defendants from tho publication of the said statements and costs of tho action. Die defence was. a general denial, and '.c was'contended that if the statements wero published, which was denied, t.h* occasion on which tho words were used was privileged, in that it w «s when tho protection ■of the interests of the , defendant association and of all unionist workers was concerned. .It Was also asserted that tlie words were not escessivo to tho'occasion, and that publication was not ex<™»ve. having regard to the interest affected. the defendants further denied having been actuated by malice. A. further defence was that if the words wore printed or published, tliey were fair comments made in good faith. Mr. Fleming said his clients had'been members of the Auckland Waterside Workers' Union for a: considerable time. Green had occupied prominent positions on the executive, and because of his thorough knowledge dad able application of the rules, wag known as Henry Nailor Green. _ The trouble arose through the plaintiffs and another member named Colvin objecting last year to pay a legal nid levy of Is. annually, recommended by the defendant federation, on the ground that .they did not. consider it could be imposed on members without a ballot. Tlie plaintiffs were "jumped' on" by the executive, and consequently were debarred from obtaining work oil tlib wharf. Colvin toofo proceedings in tho Magistrate's Court against the union and was awarded .£lO, and the present plaintiffs, in. a similar position, each received ;E5 damages, although tho Magistrate thought they were obstinato. However,plaintiffs wero fighting for tho principle that a man could not be taxed without the consent of himself, or his representatives. The alleged libel bad put upon the plaintiffs the hall-mark of the federation's disapproval, and employers would be called to give evidence thai they feared to employ the plaintiffs because of'tho watersiders. The power these men held was immense, They could hold up the whole country if they wished.

Sir John Findlay: I object. That ii pure prejudice.

Green then rave evidence and Sir John FimUay stnted that the defendant fed eratio'n,," .and Roberts, (lie secretary, accepted responsibility for publication, but it was a question whether the mere fnci of printing amounted to publication on tho part of the printer.

Sir John Findlay a?ked tho witness to try and keep his temper in. answering questions. Green gave an emphatic denial to several questions which counsel Biiid were intended to show that witness was a "source of' great trouble, annoyance, and mischief-malting on tho waterfront in Auckland,', and .Hint tho feeling against him was not due to the defendants' publication, but to other causes."

His Honour aalted witness not to make speeches, and| Green promised' to try to follow instructions. Ho apologised foi speaking in a loud voice, but explained tliat on the waterfront it grew on one. After further evidence had been hoard, tho ca3o was adjourned.

The finest : FLUID MAGNESIA . is RHARLAND'S. Moro freshly made . than imported kinds. Guaranteed, highest ETrsngth and swsst quality.—Adyt,