More Light.

Manawatu Standard, Volume IV, Issue 261, 1 October 1884, Page 2

More Light.

(TO THE EDITOR OB THB>TAirDARD.) Str,— What is there of fact and truth m the extraordinary-stor? which the agitation about the removal of Constable Gillespie seems to have brought to the surface, about an attempted indecent assault on a lady staying ul one of the hotels m this town. I believe the reception he met with was something he won't forget this side of the grave. Ami what about the case of the Native woman who had to claim the protection of an employe of anoriher hotel, against the lustful advances qf this same amorous lilteitiue? How have these stories »>een hushed up? Does Insi>eetor James know of them, I wonder ? It seems we scarcely are aware what kind of people we have m our com* munity. The facts of both the cases quoted above are town "talk. We ace told that our late Constable was r«ported for not prosecuf.iflg publicans , for Sunday trading, and that the Licencing Act was a dead letter m this place. It ia the prowling nightj birds who should know — the class of people^ ho seek to convert respectable hotels into houses of assignation and common brothels for their own .vile purposes. What woman, Native or Euiopean, or what girl even, is sahr* while. Mich sensual lustful beings walk abroad ? The story has travelled far aud near, and 'our community is not benefited by the coarse jokes made about the incident by one and other. What I want to arrive at is, had these matters anything to do with the removal of Constable Crillespie, m consequence of certain inquiries made by that officer, and certain information it is now known he had obtained, but was unable to use, owing tp persons objecting to prosecute or have their names mixed up m such a case? Does the above throw, any new light on the official changes that are such a mystery and source of indignation to the public ?— --I am, <Jcc,, .^ - 6n the Trail. These articles were read m court after which the point aro*e as to which side should open the case, when his Honor ruled Unit the defence should do so, unless no evidence was going to lie called, when, it only remained for the plaintiff's counsel to address the jury and allow them to asses the damages. Mr Shaw: No, I think we must have a little evidence from witnesses m the iii-sc place. Mr Shaw then proceeded to ' open the case for the defence, all witnesses having been previously ordered out of the court, and said r-fPiease your Honor and gentlemen 6f the jury, this action w instituted by George W. Russell, of Palmerston North, ;a journalist, to . recover the sum of £1000 damages iron John McKelvie, proprietor of the 3VI anawatu Standard newspaper, and Alexander McMinn, ajso . a journalist, editor ot the said news* paper. Ton have heard from what has fallen from his Honor that it has fallen to the lot of the defence m the action to commence. ; For our defence we admit that the articles, which you have heard read and of which you will have copies placed before you, were published m the Manawatu Standard, and we admit tbav we aluo , published # tl.ein of and concerning ,the plaintiff. Now, I mQ st call .your attention p> esently to the fact that there is no carihly 4ouM that if these im)»ut:»tions t as published, were, not true, they wouid ,be, defamatory -and libellous,, consequently it is Necessary that the defendants should put ia. the plea that the words, are absolutely true, and to prove it> and this we are prepared to do. I have here, your Honor, a number of copies of the alleged libellous matter m print, (copies distributed). Apart troin all legal verdicts yon, gentlemen, have now the two publications which are alleged to be lilellous, before you. Mr

Shaw then read portions of the first paragraph again, after which he rehumed:— Now, this really seeins'to mo to be one of the most harmless, paragraphs that could have been •written. It is hard to find an excuse for doing so, but wo have been thrown ■upon our defence, and bye-aitd-bye we shall show yon' that there was a storm m the teapot m Palmerston a little time ago. The plaintiff seems ' to have had a private "down" on the constable who was stalioued at Pmlmerston at the time, and tried to get : him removed. But ihU paragraph, •' which probably arose from the plaintiffs action, does not seem to entitle him to £1000, as the jury must very clearly see. The second extract, you ■will remember, read* as follows, (2ud paragraph, signed "On the Trail," -was read). There is. no doubt m any respectable man's mind that this letter contains libellous matter, if the statements m it are not true. Well, gentlemen, it was found that the cap fitted a certain gentleman immediately. The plaintiff m this action immediately upon its appearance gave instructions to his advisers to compience this suit. This article m it- .: self is not a thing that would lead you or me or anyone behind the scenes to fix upon the plaintiff as the man referred to m it, any more than anyone else m Palmerslou. The plaintiff immediately concluded that it \vas meant for himself. Now, had we chosen to put m a .plea.. that this did not concern the plaintiff at all, I apprehend it would have been very difficult -for Mr Russell to prove it •was meant foi him. However, it was considered more straightforward to say at once " You are 1 the person referred to," and this being the case, ; it was necessary for the plaintiff to state what reason he had for wording the complaint as he has. The plea we set up for tho defence is that of justification, we being able to prove that our statements are true. There : has been no attempt on the part of either of the defendants, from first to -."last, to -burke enquiries. You are to-day, gentlemen of the jury, on a very disagreeable issue, to decide on the tent li of the statements which were published, and the character of the plaintiff, and whether he com. initted an indecent assault on a lady m a hotel, and I feel the full responsi b'ility of advising my clients on such a point as that. But the evidence that we will shew you to-day will be that of the lady herself, and if my : instructions be correct, she will swear that what is said here is true. You will understand how hard it is for a lady to come into a Court of Justice and give evidence of this description, _»nd it 18 more to her credit that she does it, and especially as she cannot be compelled to attend here, she being at present a resident m Auckland, •which place 'is beyond the issue of •writs of this court Bui when it was explained to Miss Crawford how much depended on the evidence she coulrl give, she voluntarily threw up her professional engagements and carae here today/Then to supplement her evidence we propose to give you that of the landlord of the hotel m the scene happened, and he will tell you the state m wbioh he found Miss Crawford after she had been handled by the plaintiff. We shall also shew that the plaintiff bad tried to explain the matter by saying he had had a good deal of encouraseinent. After you have heard all this I think you will have no cause to doubt that the witnesses are unbiased and are speaking *lhe truth, even at the risk of injuring Mr Russell's reputation. 1 regret to say that, although every attempt has been made, we have been unable to discover the name of the native woman referred to. She was m Paltnerston at the time thai; the Native Land Court, *ere held there, but has since left Palmerston and gone, to Poverty Bay. But m her a bsence we propose to call the evideuce of outside witnesses \o shew what took place, and that m the presence of the plaintiff And I thiuk you will come to the conclusion that this woman was grossly iusulted by the plaintiff. Now with Regard to the plaintiff's dealings m attempting to remove Constable Gillespie, it seems that Russell had - conceived a direct animosity against this officer because he had made some enquiries regarding the ausaults he had attempted ou this woman, that provoked the indignation of several persons m Palmersum, and, m fact, a kind of Indignation Meeting was held there arid petitions were signed asking thai the removal of the constable should be delayed until an en- ? quiry should be completed. But they wouldn't wait, bnt had him removed from the town even through a. member of bis family was m a very unfit state to stand such removal. (His ' Honor hoped that no one would look upon such demonstrations as burning m effigy m any other light than as being very discreditable proceedings. They should be put down m all parts, up matter who the individual might \.be.) Mr Izard said that many other 'good men hud been burnt m effigy. ■■ His Honor then, allnded to a cast where an effigy of a . public man had been marched into Dunediu by a band of ruffians, and commented strongly upon such behaviour. Mr Shaw continued : — I only menfcioned, your Honor, that this had i lieen done, and that pnblic feeling was indicated- by it. I would m no other, way disagree with your Honor's view 'of such proceedings. It shewed the populaV feelin» which existed with regard to the removal of Constable - Giliespie. Mr Shaw then quoted other portions of the printed articles, and concluded, addressing the jury, I feel (Hire- the evidence of the witnesses will have the consideuttion ,at your hands which they deserve. Ido not hold that the affairs of private persons should be raked up m newspapers, but I must consider it right that the actions of public meu upon matters of public iniDovtance should be subjected to fair public Comment. I feel sure, therefore, that these matters will receive your consideration. Miss Louise Crawford was then called to give evidence; CLEFT SITTINO.I