A STRANGE LIBEL ACTION.

Evening Star, Issue 3534, 20 June 1874, Page 3

A STRANGE LIBEL ACTION.

An action for libel, of a somewhat singular kind, has been disposed of in the County Court, Melbourne. 'lhe damages were laid at two hundred and fifty pounds, and the libel complained of was au article called Bar Talk, which appeared in the ‘ Licensed Victuallers’ Gazette ’ on the 21st February last, the proprietors of that journal being Messrs W. F. and S. A. King. Ihe case was tried before his Honor Judge Cope and a jury of four. The publication was admitted, but not that the plaintiff was the person referred to under the initial " F.” The libel was to the effect that F (whose occupation and circumstances, as described, corresponded with those of the plaintiff) had lived with a womah who was not his wife, had ill-treated her, profited by her labor, turned her out of her own house, and almost immediately afterwards installed another woman in her place, who, in turn, expelled him from his home, after he had settled all h-a property on her. A witness was called to depose that the libel referred to Farrell. The plaintiff himself was put into the box, and was cross examined at considerable length. He stated that he arrived at Botany Bay in 1826, and subsequently went to Launceston, where he was foreman for a tanner, but denied that he worked in a gang of prisoners at Bridgewater, near Launceston, or at Mount dromedary. He was, he said, charged with stealing tallow from hia employer there, but he was liberated as soon as an explanation was given as to his conduct. He denied all knowledge of John J ones, who was put for ward as the overseer of the gang in whi- hj it was alleged Farrell has worked in Tasmania. He denied also that he knew Mrs Jones; that he had lived in her home in St. John street, Launcestown, with Eliza Bass ; or that he borrowed money from her. He was, he said, married to the last-named woman in Melbourne, but when her former husband turned up he agreed to give her L 3 a week as long as she kept away from him. The jury gave the plaintiff a verdict for the full amount claimed.