Wanklyn v. Taylor.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 3548, 18 July 1905, Page 2

Wanklyn v. Taylor.

TO Till-: EDITOR OV THE M AN'AW AT I U HERALD. Sir. —I should like your permission to make a tew remarks on your report of this case, without however wishing to make any reflections on its fairness. No doubt your reporter would see the case from a somewhat different point of view to myself, hut as it is of considerable importance to me that my business should not be in any way prejudiced by certain misconceptions which I think would follow from the wording of your report, it is only just that I should have an opportunity of removing them. Mv object in taking proceedings against Mr Taylor was not to recover (he balance which I considered he justlv owed me (the amount being too small to bo worth litigation) but to prevent what I considered to he a paltry attempt to make me a victim of petty meanness It is the first time in mv experience of boarding-honsc-keep-’ ing, that a weekly boarder should wish to deduct the full proportion of two davs absence, without apparently considering tint the accommodation must be kept available for him whether absent or not. And the Magistrate himself pointed out that this cotild he reasonably expected only in cases where boarders pay by the day. But what is more likely to be unjustly damaging to me in your report is your statement of the defendant’s witness. The defendant after having most unjustly made every disparaging reflections on the accommodation he received called a witness, who instead of supporting what Mr Taylor had to %y assured the Magistrate that the accommodation given was as good as ■mv he had ever received in the best houses. He did not have a word to sav against it despite the efforts made by the defendant’s solicitor to extract from him some admission which would be detrimental to me. I think yon will agree that in fairness to me, this part of his evidence should have been published, instead of dismissing it with a brief reference to the least important part of it, and thus allowing the unwarrantable statements of a discontented boarder to pass uncontradicted. —I am, etc..

A. WANKLYN. [No “ point of view ” weighs with the conscientious reporter ; he presents foe is and happenings, as nearlv as possible in a confined space, and we are pleased to note that our corresdondent acknowledges the fairness of our representative in this case. Her subsequent criticisms are thereby reduced to nullity ; but we publish the letter so that our correspondents own view of the matter may be ventilated.— Ed. M.H.]