DOMINION NEWS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXV, Issue 64, 22 March 1913, Page 2

DOMINION NEWS.

LIBEL ACTIONS. ‘ ' (Per Press Association.) ' i Masterton, March 20. At the Supreme Court a case was brought by William Hy. Jackson, headmaster of the Masterton District High School, Claiming from the Wairarapa Daily‘News- £6OO damages, for alleged libel. Three distinct actions were brought, firstly, that defendant falsely and - maliciously published an lanonymous letter, stating plaintiff to be ineligible to : ben a member of the Trust Lands, * being personally, and ■financially interested; secondly,!, that, defendant maliciously and falsely j published a-leading:.article asserting that plaintiff had f np business tq be ; a J/iem- , bor of - the i said - 'l'rpst Land?, ( a trust position being; anofnplous, if not illegal,, as directly interested in discussions taking place on the said trust; thirdly, defendant made malicioqp reference to, plaintiff in connection with the school committee, stating plaintiff had unduly influenced his.own committee. The .r■ //J: l) / J; .. IJU / Jl.fv' , case occupied .the greater part ot two days,- The jury/''after a' of 3i hours, feturhed a verdjct for' defendants,.jQn,..thfi,— ffr^t i and thud counts, and for plaintiff on the second count, with £25 dambgeS;' Costs were reserved-; ‘Ten days were granted, on the application of defendant’s counsel, to apply for a non-suit or new trial.

In the case Angus John Johnson, auctioneer, versus Robert Russell, a claim for £505 damages for alleged slander, a verdict was given for defendant, with costs as per scale.

, TRAMS V. MOTOR-BUSES

Palmerston North', March 20. A poll of ratepayers was taken today regarding the institution of electric trams. Last year a vote’was carried in favour of raising a' loan. Since then there has been strong agitation against the proposal, particularly on account of the inadequate route service and the necessity for an expensive tunnel under the railway line in the square. The poll to-day was the result of a petition lodged against the proposal. The voting was as follows; Against the trams 654, for trams 551; majority against the trams, 103.