PECULIAR SLANDER ACTION.

Greymouth Evening Star, Volume XXXI, 19 July 1901, Page 4

PECULIAR SLANDER ACTION.

A Stay-at-Home Campaigner. At Sydney on Juno 24, the slander case of Clarence M'lvor v. L. Kennie (general manager in Australia of the Mutual Lite Insurance Company of New York) was concluded. The alleged slander was contained in the following words, which plaintiff said defendant had publicly used regarding him in the Hotel Australia:—"He tried to blackmail me, and I won't pay for drinks for a blackmailer." Defendant paid one farthing into court in satisfaction of the claim. Plaintiff said that he was a stock expert, and did journalistic and, literary work on spe'cial subjects. On 29th June, 1809, he received a letter from Mr A. Nathan, defendant's attorney, which made witness wroth. He saw Nathan, who said: " What you are going to publish in America Major Eennie says is not true, and he will hold you responsible if you persist in publishing it." He added: "M'lvor, I am very sorry you

became so low as to try and blackmail the major." "Witness said: ''Your letter is bad enough, but don't insult me." Nathan replied: "You are a scoundrel and a blackmailer." Witness thereupon asked hira to put up his hands, but he refused to do so, and ordered witness out of the office. Witness said further: "Major Rennie must be a fool, and he must have a lunatic for a lawyer." He left the office saying that he would make Major Rennie apologise for instructing Nathan to write such a letter. Witness claimed that he had been part owner of the horse Prince Carbine with defendant, having paid 200 guineas out of the 310 guineas for which he was bought, while Major Rennie paid tho balance. Witness took the horse in hand to have him trained. Ho borrowed £6O on tho horse from a financier, which he subsequently paid off. After paying tho mortgage off he handed over the horse to Major Rennie, giving a receipt which purported to sell tho horse to R. R. Rennie for £l. Ho said to the major that the hor.so was sure to win a great race, and when ho did, ho said : "I want you to win me £'loo.''

Mr Want: What kind of a commission have you got ?

Witaess ; As veterinary surgeon to the Imperial Remount Department.

Where is it ?—I would have got it had I gone to South Africa. Then you have not got it ?—I did not get parchment, but I was appointed. Who appointed you ?—Major Thorn son. What you mean is that Major Thomson told you that when you got to South Africa you would get a commission ? Yes.

But you never got there ? —No. You lost your leg by a kick from a horse ?—A horse fell on me during a gale on board the Suffolk, Then you did not lose it on service ? I was on active service to all intents and purposes.—(Laughter.) Are you a veterinary surgeon ?—Not according to the Englisn College. You have no diploma ?—I have a long reputation.

Listen to this advertisement: "Mr C. M'lvor, the old campaigner, who saw all the great events of the war ? (Did you see them through the telescope ?—laughter)— will appear in the following suburbs, and lecture on active service in South Africa. Lectures to be illustrated with illuminated colored pictures from sketches taken on the spot."—(Laughter) Another advertisement refers to "Mr C. M'lvor, the old campaigner, eminent lecturer, and correspondent " Were you ever a war correspondent ?—No; I wrote here on war.— (Loud laughter.) I see; you wrote at the other end, at a safe distance.—(Laughter.)

Witness said that how he came to bo caUnd "Old Campaigner" was because of his pen name.

Mr Want: Will you explain how you bought Prince Carbino for £325, and yet transferred it to young Mr Rennie for £1 ? —Because in the meantime Major Rennio had advanced me something like .£238 to keep the horse.

Will you swear that in fifteen months from January, 1896, there were not fortyeight cheques of yours on the Commercial Bank dishonoured ?—No, there could not. be that many. Most of them were settled for afterwards.

The Chief Justice: Were they dishonoured on presentation ? Witness: I ha* a few dishonoured on presentation, Mr Want •• Do you owe Cohen and Lyons, bookmakers, £75 ?■ Witness: Yes. For how long have you owed that ? For some years, but I made arrangements with Mr Cohen to wait. How many years ? That the future will disclose.—(Laughter.) This closed the evidence, and the jury intimated that they did not want to hear Mr Want address them on behalf of defendant. The jury, after a brief retirement, brought in a verdict that they were satisfied that the alleged slanderous words were used, and they considered that the amount paid into court, one farthing, was sufficient compensation for the supposed loss of reputation suffered by plaintiff.

His Hon: You therefore find a verdici for defendant.