ALLEGED LIBEL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 98, 11 September 1912, Page 6

ALLEGED LIBEL.

CLAIM RECEIVES SHOUT SHRIFT. TRENCHANT REMARKS OF 111.HONOR. 11l Hit) Supremo Court yesterday Janus > Ceorge Johnson, of Eraser road, llawci.i. preferred a claim for .C3OO damageagainst Henry Weston for alleged lii. 1 in the Taraimki Herald in March last. The plainlill' conducted his own ca.se, ' while Mr. C. 11. Weston defended. In leading his case, Johnson explained J that the present action was a sequel to a libel action, in which he himself wan | plaint ill' and John O'Doiinell, .farmer, | defendant, heard in the Supreme Court at New riymouth in March last. The alleged libel a rune out of the report of the Taranaki Herald on the case, which he contended was incorrect and of a defamatory nature. As a result of his perusal of the report, die instructed a solicitor to write to the Herald, demanding a retraction and an apology. This the proprietor of the newspaper refused to do, 'holding that the report was fair and unbiassed. Further correspondence passed between plaintiff and the defendant, but all of no avail. Continuing, plaintiff explained that the first defamatory statement was contained in the heading of the case, which read, '\An Extraordinary Case." This the contended, misrepresented the case, and, as a result, people who were formerly his friends now cold-shouldered him. People seemed, in fact, to have

A DESIRE TO AVOID HIM. lie attributed this to the -publication of the report of the proceedings in the Herald. All the people who spoke to him about the case told him they 'had read the report. This led him to again peruse the report, and he then found in its contents the reason .why liis neighbors an'd friends had given him tlis cold shoulder. He alleged that there were several statements attributed to him in the Herald's report which were'an incorrect version of what he had said. He was very loth to institute the present proceedings, because lie was not particularly fond of going to law if lie could obtain redress by other means. Plaintiff was proceeding to quote passages from the alleged libel report, when His Honor pulled him up smartly, askiii'.* him what he w:is complaining about, I'laintiif rejoined that he claimed it was false.

THE JUDGE INTERRUPTS. His Ilonor then asked him what evidence he was going to call to prove that it was defamatory, and with that Johnson commenced to again read extracts from the report. This led to a further protest from His Honor. "I have," (he remarked, "read it through until T am sick of it.' Plaintiff: Well, I complain that I did not make these statements. His Honor: Well, supposing you did not?

Plaintiff: Well, that is a libel. 1 His Ilonor: Well, tell me why they should think any the worse of you after having read the report of the case. Why should it make them hate you, as you seem to allege, and ridicule you? Plaintiff then went on to say that ho .was called an unmitigated scoundrel, to which His Honor rejoined: "But there is nothing about that, in the Herald. You must confine yourself to this case.

. . . I don't see that you know what you are talking- about. " You say that they said things which to me look to be perfectly harmless." His Honor added that possibly there was something behind the seemingly innocent statements, but the plaintiff had neglected to produce a tithe of evidence in support of this supposition. The plaintiff several times had to be called to order for introducing extraneous matter into the case. Later on he said that the Herald had erroneously stated that lie had published some Irish dialects. He also denied having admitted in Court that lie had published poems about his neighbors. It made him ridiculous to say (as reported in the Herald) that he amused himself by writing poetry. His Honor interjected: But, after all, it is NOT DEFAMATORY TO CALL YOU A POET! Plaintiff: But it is ridiculous.

His Honor: It may bo ridiculous, but not defamatory, and before you call your witnesses you .have to satisfy mo that these words have a defamatory meaning. Of course it is quite ridiculous your coming; here without a lawyer. If you like to arrange with Mr. Weston to ]Kiy the costs of the adjournment, I will adjourn the case till the next sitting of the Court. Plaintiff declined the offer, and plunged again into a recital of what people, following on the report in the Herald, said he did in connection with the other libel action in which he figured as plaintiff. This brought another rebuke from His Honor: '"Did what!" he exclaimed. "[ tell you I know nothing at all about your previous action, which docs not concern this case. You have not shown me that the report has :had any defamatory effect." Plaintiff: I say that it is not a correct report of the action. His Honor: You don't appear to know what defamatory means.

The Judge added that if anybody could make a case for libel out of the plaintiff's statement of claim, he (His Honor) certainly could not. A lawyer might possibly be able to go into the whole case for him and prove defamation of character, but he had his doubts. NOTHING DEFAMATORY.

In again strongly recommending Johnson to apply for an adjournment and refer his case to a solicitor, His Honor remarked: "I want to prevent you from wasting your money." Mr. C. H. Weston: I have no objection to any adjournment. : Plaintiff: That is all very well from your point of view. . . Then your Honor holds that it is not libellous? His Honor: I told you that these words complained of are not defamatory. These mistakes, so far as the report of your statements is concerned, are, assuming they are mistakes, perfectly harmless.

Plaintiff: Your Honor would not say they were harmless if you lived in. my district. His Honor: I do not reside in your district. If you «ue a person for libel you must show upon the face of your claim that the words objected to are defamatory. This you have neglected to do. Plaintiff failed to comprehend the position of the >ase. whereupon His Honor advised him in the following strain: These are highly technical points, over which a fanner is bound to come to grief. Why did you not get a solicitor? Plaintiff: I got a lawyer to prepare my statement of claim.

His Honor: Are you prepared to adjourn the case and get competent legal advice? Plaintiff: Then your Honor eaya the statement of claim is not made out correctly? His Honor: "No. I ask you to show me what defamatory meaning these words can have, but you have failed to do so." Later on His Honor nointod out to the defendant that malice did not matter at all if he could not show defamation of character, and lie went, on to ask the plaintiff why the Herald should want to libel him. Nothing could l>e more ridiculous, he continued"! to suggest tint th» words, "An extraordinary cas-' l ." were libellous. Tt merely supported ilio theory of the subeditor or the reporter that the ease wag

a little out of the ordinary and might interest tho public. Plaintiff: Your Honor does not "understand how it has injur id mo. Ilis Honor: Xo, I certainly do not understand it! HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? Plaintiff persisted that he had a stnughtfonvird ease, and had been injured, to which Ilis Honor rejoined that he ought to get a solicitor. Plaintiff replied by flaking how much the adjournment would eorit, and, when given a rough idea, said that he did not think it would be worth while, as evsm if he got a si>licil<.v be -night be defeated on some technicality or other. Without further ado His Worship nonsuited the plaintiff, with costs according to scab'.