RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CROMWELL.

Dunstan Times, Issue 688, 25 June 1875, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CROMWELL.

—o—(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.) June 18. E. A. Drury v. J. Aitchison. This was a criminal information for libel, the libellous -writing being in a letter addressed to tho Editor ot tho Dunstan Times by James Aitchison, ami was to tho effect that Complainant would find Bell Hill a suitable field for his labors, &c. Mr Drury, who was unrepresented, in a very able address opened the case for tho prosecution. The defendant conducted his own case. Stephen Noble Brown bcingsworn, said, I am tho proprietor of the Cromwell Argus. In May last I received a letter from James Aitchison for publication, (letter produced marked B). Previously to this, 1 had received a letter from James Aitchison ; cannot produce it; consider it a privileged communication. By tho Bench.—Under what authority do you refuse to produce this letter. It not being published, do not consider it public property—The letter was ordered to bo produced. At a later stage of tho proceedings, Mr Brown said lie had searched for, but had been unable to find this letter, in all probability it had been destroyed. I did not publish this letter, but inserted a local paragraph explaining that as it was a reply to an article which appeared in the Dunstan Times, it should bo sent to that journal. After the publication of the paragraph, I had a conversation with defendant or his brother, and explained why I did not insert his letter, Tho letter marked B, and previously referred to, I published with omissions. By defendant. Do not recollect yon asking me to strike out any libellous sentences in my letter ; may have said I would for ray own protection. Cross examined by Mr Drury.—l remember having a conversation with you opposite tho Cromwell Argus Office ; will not swear that I did, or that I did not tell you tho first letter received by me from James Aitchison was more libellous than tho one published. Georg Faohe deposed,—Am proprietor of the Dunstan Times. The Complainant was the Cromwell Correspondent to that paper. In May last I received a communication from James Aitchison for publication. I did not publish it, as I considered it libellous. I however inserted a paragraph, calling on the writer to apologise,nr I would band over his communication to Mr Drury, the party therein referred to ; not receiving an apology I handed the letter to Mr Drury. Since the receipt of the letter, I have inserted uo communications in the Dunstan Times from Mr Drury, because I considered if he did not clear his character of the aspersions contained in Aitchison’s letter he was not fit to be on the staff; tho Complainant was a paid correspondent. By the defendant—Have excised paragraphs from Mr Drury’s communications. I d : d not consider it a breach of editorial etiquette handing your letter to Mr Drury, being his employer at the time, it was my duty to protect him, and accordingly acted. E. Drury deposed—Am a Mining Agent and Journalist. 1 contribute to tho Dunstan Times. In one of my contributions I commented on the management of tho road works between Clyde and Cromwell, which gave rise to the letters referred to in tho evidence ot Mr Brown and Mr Fache. I never scribbled for an illiterate publican for a nobbier or a feed, and never was on Bell Hill. By accused—Am not aware there is more than one Bell Hill anywhere. Bell Hill is the place where convicted prisoners work. Never said to anyone that if you give mo money I would stay proceedings. This closed tho case for the prosecution, and the Court adjourned till the following morning. Saturday, June 19. Tho defendant in defence urged two pleas.—“ That the writing complained of was not libellous. 2nd, That there was no proof ot publication. He afterwards called Air Brown and Mr Facbo, who failing to prove the signature or handwriting, the Bench said there not being sufficient evidence to connect the accused with the letters, the information must be dismissed.