SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2107, 15 June 1907, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

Press Association,

AUCKLAND, yesterday. The civil business of the Supreme Cc-urt sitting commenced yesterday a ’ ternoon, before Mr. Justice Deuniston when the action of Christopher James Parr, solicitor, versus Robert Frederick Way, for £550 damages, for alleged libel, was begun with a jury of twelve. Mr. Thomas Cotter appeared for plaintiff. Defendant conducted his own case. ’The grounds of the alleged libel was the publication of an article in the New Zealand Worker, of which defendant is editor,' alleging that plaintiff was interested pecuniarily in a disorderly house by lending money to the proprietress at a high rate of interest, and that he used his position as a member of the Auckland City Council to facilitate the "ranting of a lodgiughouse license to the person conducting this disorderly house. Mr. Parr was a candidate at the last general election for the City East. In his evidence, he said the license referred to w r as granted by the Finance Committee of the City Council two years ago. He was present, but took no part in the discussion. The only report the committee had was one from Constable Donovan, stating that he inspected tho house two years ago. He advertised money to lend for a client, and the woman in question applied for a loan of £SOO, and the security being good, the advance was made by his client'. On another occasion a Mr. Subritzky applied for a loan of £IBO, and he declined to give it because he could not inspect the security. The woman then saw him, and offered to guarantee the advance if made. He then made an advance on behalf of his wdfe, Mrs. Parr, at S per cent. Prior to granting the license he had never had reason to suspect her. She owned a considerable amount of property in Auckland. The case w'as adjourned till to-morrow. In opening the defence uiTTie libel case Mr. Way submitted that the words used were limited to criticism of the plaintiff’s action as a public man, and were published without malice. The Judge said as a matter of law the words were capable of a defamatory meaning. As to the plea of privilege, any such privilege would be removed by malice or the absence of good faith. These were questions for the jury. • * In the libel action brought by Christopher James Parr, a well-known Auckland solicitor, against- Robert F. Way, editor of the Weekly Labor Journal, the jury found for plaintiff with £75 damages. PALMERSTON, yestord'av. In the Divorce Court to-day the petition of E. D. S. Dawiclc for dissolution of marriage on account- of bib wife’s habitual drunkenness was dismissed on the ground of condonation- ; the cross-examination of petitioner eliciting the fact that the parties were still co-habiting. In M. V Knight v. C. A. Knight-, a decree nisi was granted, also in P. Blake v. Emily Blake, and Emily Daly v. Richard Daly.

In the Supreme Court, the case against Luther Martin and Murray, for alleged cattle stealing at Danncvirko, was dismissed. The Court was engaged for the remainder of the day w-ill hearing appeals.

DUNEDIN, yesterday. Thos. McKay, who pleaded guilty last week to nose-biting, was bound over to keep the peace for six months, and to pay the costs of trial. Judge Williams said the assault was committed under circumstances of considerable provocation, but the retaliation greatly exceeded any jirovocation offered. Under ordinary circumstances his Honor said he should not hesitate a moment to send a person doing ail act- of this kind to gaol, but the circumstances were peculiar, because the persons who had suffered by accused’s acts, the girl and her father, both absolutely condoned it, and the girl expresses her willingness to marry him, and he expresses willingness to marry her. That would be the best conclusion to the whole matter. BLENHEIM, Thursday. In the Supreme Court David Douglas was fined £25 and costs of prosecution for criminally libelling Edward Owen McGuire.