LIBEL CASE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume IV, Issue 263, 3 October 1884, Page 2

LIBEL CASE.

SUPREME COURT WANGANUI.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Richmond.) Russell r. McKelvie and McMinn [continued.] Alexander Ferguson, by Mr Shaw : l I remember Giilespies removal from I PaliiieraTon. T was not a inembor of the Licensing Bench at the time. In my opinion the constable looked after the enforcing of the Licensing Act very thoroughly. My sympathies are rather against drink, and m my opiniotLhe did well. E saw a letter addressed by Russull to James. 1 signed a paper to the effect that I would not adveitise m Russell's paper. This was chiefly because of his action m having th»* town divided into wards, as well as on account of the odium that was attached to hi* name m Palmerston. This arose from some statements that were heard of affecting hisjeharacter. They were then common town talk. CroßS:exainined by Mr Fitzherbert : T was not on good terms with Russell at the time I signed this "roundrobin" against advertising m his paper. I lived <at that time about hulf-a-mile from the centre of the Square. I don't usually spends all my time m visiting public houses. I cannot therefore be sure that there was not some drunkenness. Constable Gillespie shewed me the letter from Russell to James. By Mr Shaw : My place of business is m the Square. It would be impossible for much drunkeauess to take place without my hearing of ib next day. I have always heard par-, ticularly good reports of Gillespie. • James Fonton was then called and 1 deposed : — 1 know the plaintiff m the action. . Mr Sbaw : I propose to read a lefctev that Russell wrote to Inspector James about you. . ! Letter read as follows : — The Manawatu Daily Times office, Palmerston North, April 9, 1884, Inspector James, Wanganui — Dear Sir, I ; beg to call your attention to the following facts. For a long time it has been evident that ther« was an enormous amount of Sunday trading here. A tew JSuuday evenings ago when* walking along to my office I noticed three or four drnnken men. The. next morning a respectable resident, whose name I will give it' desired, waited upon me to publish something about it, as he said it was disgraceful that people shouW have to take ladies through scenes of the kind. I declined -to say anything about it, m the paper, but mentioned the matter to Constable Gillespie. A couple of days ago I received a piemptory notice from a publican named Fenton withdrawing all business from my paper. Last night I waited upon him and at first he declined to give any i't»a.son, saying he had a good reason, but the party who told him had made him promise not to mention his name and not to state the reason. On ray impressing- him as to the unfairoesH to me of this, he informed me that it was owing to my officionsnesa re Sunday trading, that he had been told on the best authority that it was all owing to me that the police were *o strict »s they had now become, and that he was not going to do business with anyone who did not let him alonea I told him exactly what had taken plffce und that I would not withdraw one word of what I had said to the coustnble, although 1 had not mentioned his hotel or any other, bat simply Sunday trading generally. tie said he had not said the constable had told him but he knew, the man who told him hud said tjhe truth "as L. had now admitted it," and he had promised the man secretly never go mention who had told- him. It is not difficult to infer who was the informant m (he matter. It could only have gone either directly or indirectly from the constable m my opinion, from the have manner it was directly from him by Fenton. Aud 1 yenture to think that if the relations between Constable Gillespie and the hotelkeepers are such that ' the police inform them that they had better look out for so and so, so as to avoid conTiction, and also give information as to their informant' particularly where such informant is a Justice of the Peace, the sooner a second policeman is sent to Paltner-ston or the present one changed the better. If something is not done to remedy this disgraceful working of the Licensing Act m this Botough, so fur as drunkenness, supplying of drunken men and Sunday trading are concerned, we might as well ask the Government to repeal to act altogether so fur as thi-* Borough is concerned. — I am, sir, yours obediently, G. W. Russell, J.P. Mr Fenton resumed : — ll is true that I gave notice to Russell to withdraw all business with his paper. I did not sign the " round- robin " to that effect. I had given him notice some six or eight months previous to this, to stop my advertisement and paper. He did not do so, however. The second notice I gave was only a repetition of the first, which was verbal. I did not discontinue my • business through anything that Constable Gillespie had told me. My reason for discontinuing my advertisement was that he wrote some articles on the drunkenness that prevailed m Palmerston and Sunday trading m the public-houses. It. was after this that Russell called on me. I would not tell him who had led me to l>elieve that he was at the bottom of the trouble about Sunday trading, etc., and what Gillespie had said had nothing to do with my stopping the paper. By Mr Izard : I didn't hear of many complaints of Sunday tradj-ig m Palmerston ; th« only one I heard,, was irom. Gillespie, who said he would have me up if I didn't look sharp. Henry McNeil then stated, Mr Hawkins examining : — 1 am a Justice of the Peace m Palmerston, and know the plaintiff and both defendants. I, m connection with others signed a letter or a telegram, # don't know which, to the head of the police, ■ 1 afterwards s^nt a telegram to M> W. W. Johnston, askiug for the postponement of- tye removal qf G/ille-pie, wh-'ch I was requested to do by a mimbe,r. qf Mr Johnston's constituents. The first telegram tojd tlje Inspector

that there wan a very strong feeling against the removal of the constable, ami that home party hud interfered iti a most improper way. Mr Jobnsiou replied that the constable's removal could not l>e interfered with. I h;»d at that time heard rumours affecting the personal chastity of Air Russell. These rumours weie general) v spoken of m the fcowu. -They existed previous to May, 1884. By Mr Fitzhtrbert: I remember the sitting of the Nalive^Lnnd* Oorrrt m Palmeraton. t lt was about that time that the rumours occurred, iiussell used.to yisitmyJiouse^nd^bß on intimate terms of acquaintance with me. The acquaintance affterrwarda ceased. This was IbrMjeVeral reasons. First, he took upon himself to dictate ' to the Palmers ton people about the division of the Borough, and wrote to the. Colonial Secretary privately on the matter..* I waa a Councillor, and consi-Je cd' myself and the' other Councillors slighted. Iliere was another cause tor the! severance of acquaintance. I became aware of his action wiih regard to the removal of Constable G-illespie. I did not know that Russell told Gillespie that t^waa addicted to habits of intemperanceBy Mr Hawkins : Russell used to come to my house as a friend and then lie seems. to have gone straight away the next day and reported me to the police. .; * ; Matthew Suelson, 1 am Mayor of Palmerstoni' andreme'ntber the complaints being made as to the removal of Const able Gillespie. I .wrote on behalf of several ratepayers to Inspector James to ask him to hold an investigation before removing tho constable, lul ways found the constable equal to his duty, fn fact if he had a fault he was too arduous iv his work. He prosecuted; me once for a bleach of the Arms Act and even succeeded m having me committed for trial. (Laughter)*. ' T live close to the hotels of Palmerston, and I do north ink there were any grounds for the accusation of laxity on the part of the police with regard to drunkenness ami Sunday trading:^ [ had heard rumours previous \tq May, which etfoiJtMho chastiiiy of^ussell'* character. They were vei y . common iuvfttwn. >- - •" ,t I Hy Mr Izard. i$ J don't think there was much Sunday tradings I think Palmerston is an extraordinary !goe<| place on Suudays. I heard/ the rumours as to Russell's ■ chastity as far back as two or three years ago. | am sire I heard them before the Native Land Coiiifosat. There have been some dance* giot up m Pahnerston and I believe Mr and Mi's Russell were invited to them. I don't think I have even read the paragraphs which are the cause of this^tkm. His Honor, said he coul-j.at least congratulate the Mayor for keeping out of the gossip of the place.' The paragraph was then fead.i * Mr Snelson : The rumour's I heard were affecting these particular charges. ■-'■■■ ■-■ ■•-;■ ■ ' -■ -:/ _:: % if?" ItT * > tf. By his Honor. I had heard of reports regard jng Russell's charact.er an regards continence at the titup when he first came into the disirict, but perhaps only a few had heard them besides myself. • * 'Alexander McMinn was then call bd: I am the publisher «nd editor of the Manawatu StandaW). I established that newspaper about 4 • yearn -ago. Since then the proprietorship of the jutpei* has gone to Mr MeKelvie T have been connected with journalism for about 16 years m this colony. Mr Shaw : My learned "Trends have stated that' ydu have been the cause of a great many libel actions, and that you have' been once committed for trial for criminal libel. The latter charge has since been withdrawn, but you can perhaps shew that you actions have not been precisely as stated. ■ - - Mr McMinn : The first. one was when I was correspondent to the Wnngauui Herald m about the. jear 1872. I wrote from .Foxton.in.refe^rence^ Uhthe Native "Lands' Court 4 thVre^re^rihg generally with regartLto the drunken orgies which, pneviiied^t^ere every day. Mr Ballance, then proprietor, requested we to be sure as to the facts of tho case, and aft* r giving him -full information he decided to defend the action. However, a" portidri*"of the statements were afterwards withdrawn, and no more was 's»idV That was all that occurred m the first one. The second action took place when I was editor of the Rangitikei Advocate Mr Kirkbride, the proprietor directed me to write a leading "on a certain subject, taking a certain view of it. This I did. My leader tWan then altered and added to, However the case was defended and taken to court and Kukhride won it. That was the second case which they make so much of. The third time -I- -was the prosccntoi m a case of criminal libel. There was ; a cross-action against .myself. ; tlie = fourth time t was sub-editor fco the Wangaiiui Chronicle,!; .wrote »m larlicle^luch the proprietof"saw previous to its be* ing published. ." Mr Fitzherbert defended the case anf) the. damages were for £15. The costs m this instance were defrayed m great part by public subscription. These are myexneriencen of libels.. I bare Russell no\jaalice whatever, I have frequently accommodated him by allowing him the use of my printingmaohinewhen his was oat of order, and have also supplied Jbim with paper when he had run out of it. Plaintiff did not come to me before complaining to Mr MVKetvie about the paragraphs which,. had appeared'in the Standard. (Here a letter was read from the Manawat Times of November, 1883 regarding one which had previously been published m the Standard,, and read something Ulce '**■ t^e n^osi Thos. Jordm writes a sympathetic,, letter 'to the Standard et«^, eio., « Birds of a feather " eto , etc.) - Mr Shaw. * The next letter ; pro-i ducedf was written by the plaintiff to himself, about himself, and signed^ by ' himself, and reads as follows-:— -TfcMr McMinn "ra^oqd taste, etc., oiVthig -'ulijeSi you aie not an authority. *Qn the opposite yon are. Duck slioVia no good to shoot a rhinoceros with,, etc., etc. Hence you may attack Sh,e m every way. What have I lost' by it 2 Has it injured me m ai? way t Not m the slightest '*- etc,, etc. ' Mr Shaw : In. this letter' then Itfr Russell distinctly siys l^qst nothing by you,r action to ward? jiira/. [T-q be Qqptinued,.]