MASSEY LIBEL CASE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 300, 13 May 1911, Page 5

MASSEY LIBEL CASE

BEFORE THE APPEAL COURT. By Te 1 . graph.—Press Association. Wellington, Friday. The motion for a new I rial in the libel action. Massey v. New Zealand Times, in which plaintiff claimed £2OOO damages for a libel arising out of n cartoon, the verdict going for the defendant company, is being heard by the Full Court to-day. Briefly stated, the grounds of the motion to set aside the verdict are that the finding of the jury is so defective that judgment cannot be given upon jt, that the Judge misdirected the jury, that the verdict was against the weight of evidence—namely, evidence of the memory of witnesses and of reports of what was said by members of Parliament in debates in the House and Legislative Council on November 31 and December 1 respectively. Mr. Bell, and with him Messrs Gray and Fell, appear in support of the motion, and Mr. Solomon, with him Mr. Blair, in opposition. Mr. Bell, in opening his case, submitted that the Judge's words were not sufficiently guarded, that he did not sufficiently warn the jury that if the, cartoon were a libel in fact a politician was in exactly the same position as any other person, and that the jury may have been misled by supposing it to be a political skit. Regarding the admission of evidence of memory, counsel said he had; asked that Hansard should be put in. Mr. Justice Chapman: Obviously it should not have been. You have been a member of Parliament yourself, and you have seen speeches you did not recognise as exactly corresponding with what had been said. The Chief Justice stated that Mr. Bell must contend either for a verdict for plaintiff or no verdict at all. Mr. Bell chose the latter course.

THE CASE FOR THE DEFENCE. Wellington, Last Night. Mr. Solomon, for the defence, said it was impossible for any reasonable person to come to any other conclusion in view of His Honor's directions, than that the jury intended to find for the defendant. Mr. A. W. Blair submitted that the cartoon was subject to quite other interpretations than that Mr. Massey personally distributed the Black pamphlet. The interpretation was not, and never had been, that Mr. Massey personally distributed free copies of the pamphlet. Mr. Masßcy's figure was simply used to typify the Opposition party in the same way as the donkey was used to typify the National Association. Mr. Bell having replied, their Honors intimated that they would take time to consider their verdict. >