WIDOW CLAIMS £1,000

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 760, 5 September 1929, Page 6

WIDOW CLAIMS £I,OOO

ALLEGED MALICIOUS PROSECUTION THEATRE PROPRIETOR SUED (From Our Own Correspondent ,) HAMILTON", Today. Claiming that she was charged with theft maliciously and without reasonable cause, Mrs. Bertha Priscott, also known as Mrs. Watson, widow, of Huntly, sued A. E. Powell, theatre proprietor, of the same town, for £I,OOO damages and legal expenses, in the Supreme Court today. Plaintiff had been accused, arrested and tried and acquitted on a charge of theft.

The defence was a complete denial Mr. D. D. Seymour appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. H. T. Gillies for de fendant.

Mr. Seymour, outlining the case for plaintiff, said that Mrs. Prescott was married in 1909 in England. When her husband died in 1916 she had to support a crippled son. Later, she became engaged to Watson and came to New Zealand to marry him. She refused to marry him because of his drinking habits, but lived with him in Huntly. Watson left her and she established a boarding house and had 15 boarders. Three years ago the defendant, Powell, came as a border. The other boarders objected to Powell because they regarded him as a man who took the lowest view of womankind, and the boarders gradually left. She asked Powell to go instead, and he offered to buy the house. An agreement was made, said counsel, by which plaintiff retained her personal belongings, Powell to take the house as a going concern. She was to lease it at £2 weekly, from which 30s would be deducted for board. He never gave a written lease, and she supposed everything tvas correct. Unpleasantness with other hoarders continued, sometimes culminating in free fights. Ultimately she decided to return to England.

Continuing, counsel said a dispute occurred between them regarding the ownership of various goods, and the day after the sale of deed had been completed, Powell went to the police and charged plaintiff with theft. Powell offered to drop the prosecution, but the police refused. The court dismissed the case. Plaintiff decided not to leave for England but to face her tormentor.

In the witness box, plaintiff said that early in May she got up early to get breakfast for a boarder, when Powell accused her of misconduct with other boarders. A row occurred, and Powell brought a constable in the same evening, and she explained how the trouble arose. (Proceeding.)