M.P.’s LIBEL ACTION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XL, Issue 1871, 31 August 1918, Page 3

M.P.’s LIBEL ACTION.

AN INTERESTING SUIT. Napier, August 29. Great public interest was taken to-day in a libel action in the Sup* remc Court, J. V. Brown, M.P. (Sir John Findlay) against G. W. Venables and Mulvanah for alleged iibel. The latter was represented by Mr C. P. Skerrett, K.C. The statement of claim by the plaintiff was as follows: (1) On the 9th day of May, 1918, at Napier and elsewhere in the. Dominion of New Zealand, the defendants published in a newspaper called the Hawke’s Bay Observer, the following words concerning plaintiff': “What we have pointed out we unhesitatingly state is a mean and despicable piece of dirty work. From our point of view, (John Vigor Brown, M.P., has proved himself to be a usurper, a prevaricator, and as a public representative in Parliament discredited as such both in the people’s Parliament, and out of it. The proof is all the more conclusive inasmuch as that it comes from his own mouth in Parliament.” (2) The publication was false and malicious. (3) Therefore' plaintiff prays (a) the sura of £5Ol as damages, (b) such further and oilier relief as to Ibis honourable court shall seem meet, (c) the costs of the action. The defence pleaded fair comment. Mr J. V. Brown was an unsuccessful candidate fertile Mayoralty at last election. Mulvanah is a borough councillor and proprietor of The Observer, and Venables is the print'd’.

Tin* witnesses r*nHod to-day included the town clerk (Mr M, Murray), tlie secret ary of the Patriotic Society (Mr R. 0. Anderson), •!. V. Brown (son of ■). V. Brown), (lie present Mayor (Mr H. Hill), and the Group Commander (Major Riugland). The evidence dealt with Iho finances and methods of the Napier Patriotic Society and its relation to the Mayor and Councillors. Brown was severely cross-examined by Mr Skerretl on Ids speeches in Parliament. Ids altitude towards the Germans in them, and Ids general relation to movements in the town. Th e case will he continued to-mor-row. Hearing' of the action was continued yesterday. Tin* witnesses included Mr A. 10. .lull, chairman of the Harbour Board, the Mayor, Mr H. Hill (recalled), and the High School Board’s solicitor and secretary. The jury were unable to agree upon a verdict after four hours’ retirement, and a majority verdict could not he arrived at. Mr Skerretl, for defendants, was grained leave to apply for a nonsuit, and Sir John Pindlay, for the plaint iff, asked for a new trial. Mr Justice Chapman said that leave for the latter was unnecessary.