RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2515, 9 March 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tins Dav

(Before A, C, Strode, Esq., R.M.)

Civil Cases,

Lumb v, Maguire was adjourned to tomorrow On the application of Mr Haggitt the case of Macandrew v. Dick was adjourned for a week, CHARGE OF LIBEL. Regina v. Rarton. —An information was laid agiiiust G. B. Barton for publishing a false and malicious libel in the Dai/// Times on October 7th, in which certain disclosures were alleged to have been made by the officers of the Electric Telegraph department, contrary to the Act. Mr Haggitt, with him Mr Smith, for the prosecution. Mr Macassey for the defence.

W, D. Murison, examined by Mr Haggitt: He was a director and editor of the OUnjo Bail;/ Times. He had searched for the manuscript of the article referred to, but

could not tin I it. He believed the manuscripts u ere the property of the Daily Time ; and Witness Company. If called upon to produce the manuscript of his own articles he could do so as they were under his charge Mr Barton in his piescnca and hearing never stated who was the author of the article.

J). Campbell examined by Mr Smith : He declined to say in what relation he stood to the Daily Time.} and Witness Company as he might thereby criminate himself. (Hr Smith appealed to the Court.) He was reputed and acting manager of the Company. Tne only receptacles for manuscript copy when ho ree.ivoil his subpnma were the accountant’s and manager’s room. He had searched for the manuscript of the article but could not find it.

C. M. B. Muston, sub-editor of the Daily Times and U r iturns Company, examined by Mr Haggett: He saw the manuscript of the article of October 7th, which was in the defendant’s handwriting. The article as it appeared in print, was an exact copy of the manuscript, unless through oversight in comparing the printed text with it, or slight verbal alterations m>t affecting the sense, lire case was remanded to Tuesday.