Seddon v. Taylor.

Manawatu Herald, 18 February 1905, Page 3

Seddon v. Taylor.

SETTLEMENT OF THE CASE. LITIGATION TERMINATED. EACH PARTY PAYS OWN COSTS. (N. Z. Times.) The slander action Seddon v. Taylor hat been settled out of Court. The following are the terms of the settlement that hat been arrived at: —

Both parties to this action recognise that there is every probability of a succession of trials without any definite result except heavy expense of law costs —hence each side agrees that it is desirable to terminate this litigation. (i.) Mr Taylor admits that had he, before making his speech in the House, been informed of the evidence which was afterwards given at trial, he would not have given made any statement in his speech implying that Captain Seddon bad been court-mar-tialled. (2.) Captain Seddon admits that had he known Mr Taylor merely answered MrDuthie’sinterrogation in the manner proved, and that he made prior to any action being taken no other publication outside of the House of Representatives, he would not have brought this action. (3.) Captain Seddon admits that Mr Taylor made his speech in the House in good faith. (4.) Mr Taylor admits that Captain Seddon was not court-martialled, but the evidence shows that an informal inquiry, at which Captain Seddon was not present, was held into the Blesbok Spruit affair, but there is no evidence to show that Captain Seddon was found fault with as a result of such inquiry. (5.) Both parties regret that any occasion was given to bring the action, and that, having been brought, the verdict of the jury was inconclusive. (6.) Each party agrees to treat this as an honourable settlement of this action, and without limiting the effect of the foregoing admissions nothing in this settlement shall be regarded as in the nature of an apology by either party. (7.) The action to be withdrawn, each party to pay its own costs.