SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2520, 15 March 1871, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS,

Tins Day

(Before Mr Justice Chapman.)

SLANDJSK.

Alexander Annan v. Robert Wilson —Mr Barton, with whom was Mr MTvcay, for the plaintiff. Mr Harris for the defendant. The declaration stated that, on the loth October hast, the defendant falsely, &c., spoke and published of the plaintiff the following, i.e., “You are d—d thief; you stole sheep from Frederick Jones ; I have seen you carrying them away on your b ick whereby the plaintiff was greatly injured in his trade and reputation ; wherefore he claims LSOO damages. The defendant pleaded first, denying the material allegations contained in the declaration ; second, that the words spoken arc true, in this, that before the date of their publication, to wit, towards the end of 1869, one Frederick Jones was the owner of a large stock of sheep), which were i mining on his land at Tuma ; that the plaintiff sto’e one of those sheep ; and the defendant published the words compdained of, wellknowing that fact. The plaintiff by replication denied all the material allegations contained in the second pdea. The facts relied upon by the pdaintiff were these :—The plaintiff and defendants are brothers-in-law, and are farmers residing in the Waikouaiti district; the former having been a tenant of Mr F. Jones of Tumai. On October 15, 1870, a small action was brought in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, Waikouaiti, in which Wilson claimed L 8 2s from the plaintiff, but only succeeded in recovering the sura of 12s, which had been piaid into Court. This result, it was alleged, bad

caused illfeeling. Plaintiff on his way home, called at the Bendigo Hotel to make some purchases of oats from a man named Diack ; and while there lie was accosted by the defendant who addressed him thus :—“There’s that d d thief going without paying for his drinks,” and immediately afterwards in the presence of a number of persons used the words complained of. The evidence for the defence 'consisted of that given by the defendant, bis son, aiid a farmer named Ryan, It was stated that on a certain Sunday in September, 1869, the first-named met the plaintiff coming from the direction of Tumai, carrying a lamb in his arm®. Defendant knew the lamb to be Mr Jones’s ; told him so, and advised him to lay it down, or he would inform ; adding that he heard before and after lie came to the country that ho (Annan) was addicted to sheep-stealing, and that he had caught him at last. It was further alleged that he had kept this lamb tied up for a week, and that it had been seen by the defendant’s son and Ryan. All these allegations were flatly contradicted by the plaintiff, who stated that at the time referred to Mr Jones did not possess any sheep. Verdict for plaintiff; damages, one farthing.