LIBEL ON THE MAYOR OF PATEA.

Patea Mail, 14 February 1882, Page 3

LIBEL ON THE MAYOR OF PATEA.

CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. Patea K.M. Court, This day, before Mr C. A. Wray, R.M. Evidence for the prosecution in the criminal libel case, Mayor of Patea v. John Black, was continued, after several adjournments. C. Finnerty, surveyor, said the impression formed in his mind, on reading the News article, was that the proprietor of the Mail was supposed to have bad an opportunity to examine the News tender before sending in his own tender. I have seen nothing in print since that time that could alter that impression. I say Mr Hamerton, in cross-examination, endeavored to ascertain whether, if the witness read certain other matters, he would still have read the article in the same sense and formed the same impression. Mr Barton contended that, if the other counsel continued on that line for a fortnight, any subsequent impression which the witness might form as to the meaning of the article could not affect the question before the Court. The question is, what impression did he form at the time. Magistrate : Whether that, impression ■was right or wrong, that has nothing to do with it so long as it was a genuine impression. Mr Hamerton ; The whole theory of cross-examination is to ascertain whether the impression he.arrives at is just. Magistrate : We must take the impression he formed at the time, and you cannot qualify that impression now. Witness continued : I say that, taking the meaning of language, the article bears the construction I put on it. The whole article is one of strong condemnation of the Mayor. The concluding part of the article certainly confirmed me in the impression I had formed. The article held him up to contempt and ridicule in contempt. I attributed very little importance to the article when I read it. On thinking over the matter, I attached a larger importance to the article. I don’t think the article has lowered Mr Sherwood in my estimation. [Case continuing.]