SLANDER CLAIM

Hokitika Guardian, 16 August 1933, Page 5

SLANDER CLAIM

BY TOWN CLERK

AGAINST A CITY COUNCILLOR.

(Per Press Association — Copyright.)

WELLINGTON, August 15. . Damages amounting £6OO are claimed by C. L. Bishop, Town Clerk, at Eeastbourne, from A. T. R. Duncan, a member of the Borough Council, in an action at the Magistrate’s Court. Tim allegation is that the defendant at a huge public meeting used words that, the plaintiff contends, meant that the plaintiff had taken benzine, the property of the Council, in excess of the ire© allowance, and without paying for such excess, thereby committing theft as at servant.

Mr Hoggard, counsel for plaintiff, said that defendant was formerly an employee of the Council. Before the action was brought, plaintiff’s solicitors wrote to defendant, demanding an apology for, and a withdrawal of statements. Defendant replied that. he had never accused plaintiff of taking petrol, and consequently could not withdraw a statement that had never been made. In spite of defendant’s denial that he had any defamatory intent, he proceeded to search for evidence in support of the accusation. Following a meeting of the Council, defendant took steps to inspect the Council’s books, and finally, expressed himself as satisfied that plaintiff had not taken any benzine over and above his allowance without paying for it. Outlining the general grounds of defence, Mr Leicester said the defendant, who was a candidate for the Eastbourne Borough Council election, and who headed the poll so far as the male candidates were concerned, was particularly .concerned with the question of the administration of the Council’s bus service. It had been considered' by four out of the nine Councillors that his dismissal was . Unwarranted, and that feature of the matter must form an element of consideration in the case. His defence was that his'speech was directed throughout at what - he deemed to be maladministration of the service. The deffiheg, far as: -...the words were ‘was that-Isss precise words..mentioned hi the states) ment of claim • were>~not : used, by de-~ fendant, and that- the /Tahguagei'usecl could not be taken by any ’reqsbnabiq listener to raise the inference that: in©; plaintiff had stolen any petrol. ..There was never any suggestion, nor had there been, that whatever petrol plaintiff obtained was >(not charged-up, to liini in the ordinary way. It-Would also be pleaded that defendant was addressing a meeting of ratepayers; that defendant was an elector, and was entitled to criticise the affairs of the Borough; and that anything lie said on the occasion was privileged. V along , the lilies of Mr Haggard’s opening address was . given by the plaintiff. Cross-examined by Mr Leicesterj the plaintiff-stated that the defendant’s address was more In the nature, of an attack upon the then mayor and himself rather Than criticism of borough affairs, Mr Leicester: In the matter ‘of administration ?—lt was more personal. Mr Leicester: Did he refer to the fact that some persons had been prosecuted for stealing benzine from the garage?—Yes. Mr Leicester: Did he say that if drivers neglected to book up petrol, no one was the wiser I—Yes. , Counsel: Did he attribute this state of affairs to want of • supervision 1 —Possibly. - T- ■' . ' •-« " / Counsel: Did he go on to soy that the Council had from time to time supplied the garag© with pounds and pounds worth of tools, and that the tools were mostly stolen, lost or grayed ?—No. • -

Counsel: Did he go on to say that he had occasion to complain during his term of 'office as an inspector that Councillor Wise had authorised repairs effected at the garage? Witness: He said he had complained to the office about various matters, and I took no notice of him. .

Counsel: Did he not say that if lie were elected lie would put a stop to the practice of supplying people with Council petrol P—No. , Counsel': Did he refer to the Mayor’s car being in the garage for attention At various periods ?■—No. •Counsel: Don’t you remember him saying: “This aort of thing has got to cease, and I want to tell you that, if the Mayor places his car in the garare to-morrow/ it will be blown out, and he will he blown out with, itP” —I don’t remember that. Witness said that any petrol that he booked up would be booked up in a perfectly open manner. At some periods he would, be owing the Council for two or three months’ petrol.. The Council was always safeguarded. Alfred William Press, managing director of Thompson Bros., Ltd., testified to what he heard at the meeting, ' "Do I take it,” said the Magistrate after hearing the evidence, “that the impression made on your mind was that the defendant suggested the plaintiff was getting benzine dishonestly, and cloaking it by faking the bus running sheets?” Witness: That was the impression on my mind. The case for the- plaintiff "had not been completed when the Court- adjourned until to-morrow morning.