Pahiatua Slander Case.

Manawatu Herald, 4 October 1892, Page 3

Pahiatua Slander Case.

The heanng of the case in which E. Naylor olaims from J. P. Clarke of Pahiatua, £100 damages for alleged slander occupied the Masterton District Court last week. The case arose out of the poisoning case at Pahiatua last Christmas. Plaintiff alleges that in December or January last defendant falsely and maliciously published the following words: — " This was not intended, for it would never have happened if it had not been for Diokson ; I believe that Clarke was the man that did it, and nobody else" that "Clarke had poisoned Diokson and other persons and had only escaped proceedings through being a Mason " ; " that Clarke was the man who put poison in the meat at my house." The statement of claim : — " That in speaking and publishing of and concerning plaintiff in matters aforesaid defendant meant that plaintiff had been guilty of an indictable offence." The defence is a general denial of the allegations. - The evidence went to show that Naylor had mentioned Clarke's name in connection with the poisoning case on more than one occasion, but the witnesses contradicted themselves as to the actual words used. The plaintiff, under cross-exam-ination, stated that he did not re* spond to the invitation of the Woodville Examiner to show his whereabouts on the night of the poisoning fcecause he thought the articles were inspired by Naylor. He had not taken proceedings before, on the advice of his solicitor, because he wished the police to solve tbe mystery He admitted- having been on unfriendly terms with deceased, Dixon, and having written a strong letter to him. Mr Tosswill, for the defence, applied for a nonsuit on the ground that the aotual words set out in the statement of claim had not been rpo*ed>

His Honour, Judge Robinson, decided not to grant a nonsuit in the Clark-Naylor case, and the evidence for the defence was therefore taken and concluded at 4 80 o'clock, Naylor defliecl the allegations of I the plaintiff as to the use of slanderpus words. Altogether he was subjected to a severe cross.examination. , At 6 o'clock the jury retired, and iti 20 niiriuifes retdrned with a verdict for the plaintiff for' &B and costs £20 14s. -Press Association