A RISQUE POSTCARD

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10288, 24 May 1919, Page 7

A RISQUE POSTCARD

CAUSES LIBEL ACTION WOMAN PLAINTIFF WINS £IOO. One of thoso risque postcards was the tangible evidence in a libel case of very deep interest that has been threshed dut at Te Kuiti, with a result in favour of the plaintiff, a married woman named Nellie Collett, who sued collectively William Heath, farmer, of Mokauti, his wife, Priscilla, and their son William, on account of this postcard that -Mrs Heath sent her husband.

The card was enclosed in an envelope, but upon the address side was written the words: "Hard luck you cannot trust your wife out of your sight." On the face was a series of pictures intending to show, first, n theatre party of two, then a tete-a-tete supper, then mutual caresses, and finally a couple wheeling a perambulator. All these were entitled "The Girl Question," and across the face of the girl was' written plaintiff's name, whilo the man was labelled as F. Hose, who Is in real life a, married farmer, neighbour c-f the Colletts. Mr G. P. Findlay represented the plaintiff, and counsel for the three defendants was Mr J. D. Vernon. Mr E. W. Burton, S.M., heard the case, in which tbjk plaintiff claimed that because this postcard had been sent to her husband, the happiness of her home was broken, she herself was given much mental anguish, and the communication had the effect of greatly injuring her character and reputation. Therefore she claimed £2OO as damages brought the action, she asserted, to clear up her reputation in the eyes of her husband. Counsel for the plaintiff said relations between two families had long been strained, 'and it was contended that Mrs Heath herself had caused the postcard to be sent., Mrs Collett, during the absence of her husband in camp, had been living with friends in the somewhat wild district of Mokauiti. She had herself received the letter addressed to her husband,- and had given it to him unopened. Mrs Collett said Willie Heath, the son, had come to her house to ask if her husband had received the card, and W'illie told her he posted it, although his mother had thought of burning it, and then decided to "let it go for a piece of fun." Witness denied absolutely that 'there was the slightest foundation of truth in the allegations on the card, which had been taken, by both herself and her husband to mean that she had been unfaithful to him. Mrs Heath had denied to witness having sent it, but had afterwards admitted the fact.

A Mrs Barlow, friend of the Heaths, told the. court she had written tho words that had made the card a personal insinuation, hut she maintained that she had done so simj>ly as a friend, and because Mrs Heath was no scholar, and had not the slightest thought of harm. The card itself originally came from Miss Gladys Heath. The evidence of Willie Heath and his mother was rather contradictory, but the statements of the Colletts could not be shaken, and after a considerable hearing:, the magistrate gave the verdict against the Heath family, saying that .in. his, opinion Mrs Heath was undoubtedly a party to the libel, and since relations between her and Mrs Collett had been strained for eighteen months 'she had acted with' malice In fact, and not merely malice in law. In view of other evidence, the magistrate considered that her treatment of plaintiff for many months had gone close to persecution: he held also that since she had published tho libel, she had tried to avoid liability bv untrue statements, and had evidently induced her children to give untrue ac-. counts also, which accounted for the diversity of their remarks under crossexamination. Parliament : had held that damages were due to any. woman if allegations were made concerning her chastity, although no actual damr?u d n h! n done " He awarded Mrs Collett £IOO and £24 costs.