TEACHER DEFENDS NAME

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 826, 21 November 1929, Page 1

TEACHER DEFENDS NAME

Slander Claimant Non-Suited FARMER’S PLEA OF PRIVILEGE School Chairman Sued HOLDING that Thomas Randall Jenkins had acted under his qualified privilege as chairman of the school com mittee. in making a statement reflecting on the conduct of Percy McDonald toward girl pupils at the Te Ranga School. Mr. Justice Smith non-suited McDonald in a slander suit a! the Supreme Court today. McDonald was formerly sole teacher at the school and claimed £550 damages.

The action was based on the allegation that about June 13 last. Jenkins had used these words in conversation with a farmer: “Have you heard of the trouble with McDonald interfering with the hig girls at the school?” It was claimed that by this state- j ment, defendant meant that the j teacher was guilty of criminal acts ! toward the pupils. The defence was a denial of the use of the words cr, alternatively, privilege. Mr. R. A. Singer conducted the : plaintiff's case, and Mr. H. O. Cooney j represented the defendant. McDonald is a married man with : a family, and though an uncertificated teacher, has been in charge of the ! Te Ranga School for some years, i according to Mr. Singer. The slanderous words were allegedly used by i Jenkins when he approached a neigh- ; houring farmer, Mr. Birkett Mossop. i to put up a teacher filling McDonald’s , position during the Education Board's ! inquiry. When the statement was j made Mr. Mossop remarked upon (he • seriousness of the subject but, counsel said, Jenkins replied that no harm was done. Strong objection to the introduction ! of slanderous words that were not I pleaded was immediately raised by i Mr. Cooney, but Mr. Singer contended : that he was entitled to present the ; whole of the conversation which ex- ] plained the true meaning of the words. ! Lengthy legal argument upon this j issue was heard by the Judge in 1 Chambers. NEW TEACHER COMING Mr. Singer said that Jenkins told ! Mr. Mossop that unless he accom- i modated the woman teacher, who : was to take McDonald’s place, the ; school would have to be closed be- i cause no one else would take her in, ! the feeling in the district being in favour of McDonald. Birkett Mossop. a Te Puke farmer, said that about June 13 Jenkins approached him to board the woman teacher coming to take McDonald’s place, as no one else would accommodate her, and she would have to be sent back, and the school closed. “He asked me, ‘Have you heard about the trouble with McDonald, interfering with the big girls at the school?’” said witness. On inquiring if the actions were serious, Jenkins said that there was no damage done. An objection to the admissability i of this evidence was made by Mr. j Cooney. ■ 1

I'uder cross-examination. Mossop said iiis children were attending the school Then Jenkins made ihe statement fo him. He went on to deny any knowledge ihat an Education Board inquiry had beeu held at the school, or that Jenkins had informed hint McDonald had been suspended. He was practically a stranger to the district at that time, he said. He admitted that he knew that McDonald had left the Education Board’s service. This concluded the case for the plaintiff. CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE Moving for a non-suit. Mr. Cooney submitted that the statement was made by Jenkins, as chairman of ihe school committee to a parent, whose children were attending the school. Counsel declared that Jenkins whs under an obligation to communicate any serious reflection on the conduct of the teacher to children's parents, and was entitled to discuss and t-Il them the full nature of the allegations against the teacher. He claimed that it was a clear case of qualified privilege, and that the onus of proving malice was on the plaintiff, who had to produce testimony of other statements. His Honour: Has the chairman of a school committee any right to go outside the committee? Mr. Cooney: Yes: a chairman has the right of communicating such subjects to any parents who have children attending the school, as parents have a common interest in the conduct <*f the teacher. Mr. Singer argued that the defence had not produced any evidence fhar defendant had made the statement m exercise of privilege. His Honour said he thought that Jenkins, as chairman of the committee of a country school, had a common interest with the parents of children attending the school, concerning the conduct of the teacher, and was entitled to discuss such questions with them. Therefore, he considered, the situation of qualified privilege arose, and the defence could only be ousted by proof of malice, which had not been furnished. The defendant was, therefore, entitled to a non-suit. Mr. Singer said that plaintiff had been absolved from any charge of improper conduct, and Mr. Cooney supplemented this by explaining there was no allegation of indecency against McDonald.