ALLEGED LIBEL

Taranaki Daily News, 10 December 1921, Page 7

ALLEGED LIBEL

_ COU£T. THE JQCKEY CLUB BOOTH. STATEMENTS, AT A MEETING. Two hotelkeepers in New Plymouth figured 9ibei Whi*h was heard before Mr. Justice Reed and a jury in th*fetpMm<Ca«wt,-N'n«- Hjmwoth, yes- _ _Tha - Edwio \yhit-T-le, claimed the sum of £5Ol damages from William Emeny, alleging that statement* made by Emeny at the annual meeting of -the Tararfakj, Jbckey* Cltfb dja July 26 were 4k fam stagy '-efr- plaintiff's character. The statements referred to concerned the management of booth at the racecourse. Mr. J. H. Quilliam, with him Mr. R. H. Quilliam, appeared fqr plaintiff, and Mr. C. H. Weston conducted the defence. The following jury was empanelled: M. J. Marsh, W. C. Bridger, N. A. ChristianW fSrlWtlhiYs 6t the case Jfc- Ifcth-pWHue *«e »»•«- .IWWPVS .earwiw «» buswess in New Ply- »— <md« MheKfllt M *e *««• jiak* Lmlwy; Ctuiz an July 3S. Wh«ie 'fe nte»e, nd with the exception of otie year Aa<i c<naiue«od Ae.booth sinoe 1008. At U• wsa aU<*e<l that plaintiff said: ‘‘The privileges of the booths shouldtxT sold by auction and the edSiffiittee sheuM th it that all liquor sold was true to label. I have no doubt that the liquor*. supphaA to the stewards’ room was true to label, but the liquor sold in the booth was not.” The words, it was alleged, were intended by the defendant, and understood by the persons to whom they were spoken, to mean that the plaintiff in the course of his business as a publican sold liquor of bad qilality. but purporting to be liquor of /xJd quality. In'tepfy, defendant denied that he had spoken any words reflecting on Whittle, as a member of the Taranaki Jockey Club he considered it his duty to recommend that the booth be put up for auction, that the size of the glasses .should be and that -the liquor should be true to label. Emeny contended that he was acting in the interests of the puMfc, that the occasion whs a privileged one and that he believed what he said to be trdE

mvttitt WcrtrfWs. CetfMVb *s«- -he ctnfld suggest a reason for the charges made by Jtrrrftny- Sotae -time befpre the annual . Mtrrrc iw Wl7 the New Plymouth hotelkeepers voluntarily arranged to close their pxepiisea at,a time other than required by Jaw. All the publicans excepting Emany ‘ pk>qs. Some time . af|er this met Emeny Q»d said: “I under- ‘ ’gand you are stating that you were not going tp close while aqother hotelkeeper and llet people in the back door.” He agked Emeny fof an explanation of fnis, out Whittle walked away not satisfied, and since then the parties had nof been on sf-ea'kin< fdfms. This incident, counsel I suggested, frii’ght account for tfie zefil \ ’ *£h EifleffV would* likfe them to think prompted ffifn to MSfif tfp fin? qWStMrf of the SMe of firfnof st fße W6tl». This hot all, howwef, for M ffife fneeting in 1917 Bmeny had said that it was- no use Wm puttin© in a fender beeatfse aU tenders •were opesod and- th© oontents disclosed to .Whittle. This also constituted a charge against the late chairman (Mr. C. Lepper) and the secretary (Mr. E. P. .Webster*, and the chairman waited on the defendant the next mprniqg for the purpose .of getting a withdrawal. Emeny slid not withdraw, and" stated he had. been told differently. furfHer" happened fill January, 1918, when in consequence bi tfhat he had heard, Whittle’s solicitors wrote rrfti&ating to Emeny that unlefei fie dtSisted in forking certain a writ fclairtfng damages w'ould be isstfe‘d against him. For sOme time? after that letter there ww nothing to cottrplaift of, and «t the ensuing annual meeting of the elub Emeny withdraw the statement he had made concerning the handling of tenderg. The. statements, however, had been allowed- to- remain uncontradicted for a whole year. Counsel then, dealt with the incidents_,at the meeting of the club on July 26 of this year, and in respect of which the action .was brought. During tfie discussion on the report and balance-sheet Emeny rose and said that when a man called for a lonjg beer at the booth he was served with a pony glass, which was riot right, and he af«n sa*d thaf fhe committee should fbat fiqtfor' sold was true to label. At ftfs stag® of the the chairffran arid 6thrfr prorated* against the 6f !?!?* sthtt-tnertrs being made in Whittle's •ftfceu*. add 1 rfrhat he Was 4ayinlg. and he Wished WhiMie Wft present to hear it. Mr. Quifliain Orgeri' that im Merkm© t»he. charges Emeny was actuated by malevolence, and it was atldoin ear caw* such malevolence’ as Emeny hbd displayed towards Whittle over a ternr of years. ‘ MOST SBkiUUb CHARGE” i .. Reviewing, tpe facts, hfr. Quilliam said that the. sta/pnents were made at a meeting at which there was an'attendance of abopt ?5. i Jt would not take the jury long to assume, how many people would krrow of thaf the next day iri a towto of the* sfkb of SMw PiymtAith. The charge maiTd a most serious one. If Emdhy ? s statements hid been tfue Whittle whs ’Hable to a. substantial penalty under the Licensing A<*f, as the law regarded serithe sale of not true to label. Obviously the plaintiff could not take such a charge lying down, but though, deterjnWted* to* stop it he was reluctant to take icOurtr proceedings. An opportunity was given- to Emeny to withdraw, but a letter askfer'for apology drew no reply. Tfie writ was then issued, but Whittle .was still anxious to. have the master settled. A reply was received Jrom Emeny’s solicitors assuring that he bore Whittle no ill will, that anything he said was as a member of the Jacicey Club, that Emeny was sorry tfie remark* had been misconstrued, but unless J£hittle. was prepared to accept tjip assurhe would have to file ajstatexnenf of deff'ncgl There was not one word of 3pfiiogy» an “ plaintiff had ho' alternative but to fcrihg the action. Whittle had a record of 27 years as license’e, of Which 20 f years had been spent in New Plymouth, i and he had no black marks against hirfi. ! ’ claim, couhsel skid, Was for £5Ol . ' .msgea, but heavy damages Were not aski Tfie case was not a money-making eihedition, and the jury was aske<l to ■•aWWff damages jherejy to act as a deterrent to Emeny, and which would be sufficient to ensure /hat Whitfig would nqt out of pocket over the proceedingsEvidence whs given by plaintiff briefly on the lines of hie eounsefs address, and he was cross-examined by Mr, Weston, ; I ax'yyct the statements which you aefaitemr of were only what had bwa

repeated, a book on tfro Statements be has macle- They have become rather irksome.

Do you know that what Emeny said Mgis auite UI close his hotel, provided every hotelkeeper handed hjs. the police ?—I only know wnat I heard. What of that letter?—when the police went into Emeny’s hotel he asked them -to Hopewell, what else?—There were several others, which I can’t' femember. J Suggs#, xish.» m fl ; ixf.J9.4j temperament,’it did not take much.—l cbalWrrge that statement." THE BOOTH On some occaslbhs the rights were let by straight-out contract? —I have always filled iq .a. tdndar. You will admit that this concession has been a valuable one; riwrt you have made considerable profits out of it ? \pl wnrifli pbjeaied to a question asking what the average profit was in the past 17 years, and- 'Manor said he did not think the question was admissible. !&*• Weston submitted that the question was important in the defendants interests, and His Honor reserved the point. Po you suggest that you have sustained Ai?y mwoetary ioßs.ra-’Xee, from the date of tnat meeting .1 have shown a falliajg»off of l6s da,y. Of co-ursg I don’t attribute that all tp Eqaeay. Whit dp you think.has caused It is very significant when aw old customer asks as to the genuineness of a label when he is fianded. a certain brand. Is .there anything. I expect rhe general depression. You had the booth at the Hynt Club races and hftve got the bootha again at the Jockey Club’s ra?es. —Yea. So you haven’t lost any booths over this.—Nq. In the newspaper reports of Use annual meeting of the club there was, no mention of the booth matter. —rWpll, I suppose if there had the papers would hsye beeh open to an action. Copies of the reports from tfie News and the Heralif were produced by Mr. Westoq. Emeny was not the, first who objected to the way of disposing these booths r —7I Tieafd that the late J. Hawkins and others Were forming a syndicate and were going to get th# booth put up to auction. Did you heaf that in 1914 Hawkins itioved that the bocifhd be put up "by auction ?—No.

But. you imtftediately heard when Emeqy moved it?—Thefe is a vast difference in the Statefn6nts. May I suggest to you that there was another reason which caused you to have anything but feelings of kindness towards Emeny, and that was his refusal td put up the price of spirits?—No. Emeny left tfie of the Licenced Victuallers’ Association with the impression that he was i going to charge 9d. Do you know his reason wfis that same publicans Were charging Cd to their friends a-ftd the higher price to others?—l heard the same thing about Emeny, and that he watchds the “flips” pretty well. Wefctld it be a surprise to Voil to know that Erteny -has not the Slightest illwill against you?—lt would be a great surprise. In fadt that he father admired you? —That wolild be the surprise of ihy life. WITNESSES FDR PLAINTIFF. Evidence was given by James McLeod, master printer, to the effect that he was at the annual nreetiqg of the Taranaki Jockey Club in 1917, when there was what was more or leas an annual discussion oq the question of booths. The chairman said the system of tendering was quite fair, but Errteny. said it was not fair, and that it was no use_ tendering because the tenders were divulged. At the meeting the following year the chairmarr reported that he had interviewed Emeny, who was satisfied that his charge was not correct. At last year’s meeting Emeny protested against the continuation of the tender system, drew attention to the sizes of the beer glasses, and stated that the committee should the question of auctioneering the privileges. The next speaker, W. Ca Weston, protested against an allegation made by Emeny that the liquor at the publican’s booth was not true to label. Emeny said it was so, and that he could prove it. Other speakers s#id it was hardly’ fair that the matter should be brought up in the absence of Whittle, and witness also ..spoke, stating that he had no knowledge of liquor being untrue to label. The Chairman told Emeny that he would have an opportunity to move at a later stage .of the. meeting. In response to someone, Emeny said that no <k>ubt the liquor in theL. stewards’ room was all right, but in the publican’s booth it would be a different matter.

To Mr. Weston: The attitude of the committee was against auctioning privileges because the highest bid•der might- be an andesirable person to hold the booth. The committee encouraged’ tenders; bnt for sofae years the orrly tenderer had been Whittle. Erheny might have added the clause a’bdiit Ikjudr being true to label as a protection in the evtfnt of the privileges beirig disposed of by auction. James* Gdfcia, reporte? oh the staff of the Taranaki Daily New's,'said ho femembered* that at a meeting of the Jockey Clufi some years ago Emeny had discussed the question of the booth, and defendant inferred that it was no use putting in a tender, and practically alleged that it was piit m- the waste paper basket, and that tenders were divulged to some third party with the ’.object of giving that person the opportunity to get the booth. Witness gave particulars of the incident at the last annual meeting, as already described. The inference from Emeny’s remarks was that liquor had been sold at the booth. The statement was a charge against the person who conducted the bdoth, 1 namely, Whittle. A. T. Moore, reporter on the Taranaki Herald, also gave evidence as to the discussion at the Jockev Club’s meeting. Emeny, during his statement, affirmed that liquor sold was untrue to label. He appeared to get angry as the discussion ensued. Other evidence for plaintiff was given on the above lines by L. A Nolan and E. P. Webster, chairman an<i secretgxy 01 the club, respectively, and A. R. Standish. THE DEFENCE. Tn addressing the jury on behalf of the defence, Mr, Weston said at the outset thftt Emeny had no feeling of illwill whatever tow'ards Whittle. At the annual meeting of the Jockey Club, .-when Emeny mentiohed the matter of the booth, he had no thought in his mind but to advance the interests of the club. Emeny was a member of the club, a racehorse owner, and, as could be imagined, he’ h*as an enthusiast in the affairs of tflp club. From his business a pnblicap hp recognised the value of the and considered that the rights for four days were worth something. F°r ond reason ’ another WbUtte had received tfie pou-

trol of the booth every year with one exception for the last IS yeats. In some

instances no one tendered against him, and in others Tie got the booth though he was npt the highest tenderer. In 1914 a reS'dlutidfi had 4;4en‘ ‘piit forward in favor of calling tenders for the privileges. Apparently from about vhat time the impression got abroad that it vxaft no uac tmtAwing .ug*>f um» Hi at y.9^ r 9V iX f° that there no bttjr blit Wattle. t w tjyi artaij-3 .Jjluifny fq\ii)4, lys jijja ffas tliat c|pb wsis JQ9 re or i es # hiding a <4 ? n< j I,e -tfieri?” iJjjey bg pus up £0 T-te IW I had {ui, unfpjtj,sa,tp, and .wtu) a U'diiJg qggirist tb,ig methoi for ,Uie thpt the highest Wdor ..jaight mA he u tsattafii.? Emea-y’s resolution, thanefrire, stipulated tjjat if >41)9 pnivilegea . were .put to auetioa, ;w4u»ev«r euccwlfid iw.ouW have *0 c*f?y -out -his abUgaitioud. Heca.us.e he jnQY‘>i .the resolution some meinbera took exceptwa to it a» an insinuation against Whittle* ’ f Defendant, in evideppe, said that,. t.Q? gether with the late he liad views on (.he questlop q£ tne df, tfye p ( ii blimp’s fioptii, gnd was,' the of the. reaolptiqn retpe epuypiftes -di tfie Tara.npki to dispose, of the privileges by Render, the qnnuaj meeting of the club on 'ritn?ps nftticeii a,n of on the balance sjieet uudjar the beating ,of sale of priand he remarked, that the club was still in thp of giving the booths away for nothing- The ehair,xn»n replied iriat he (Emeny) had a chance of tegdar.Hl# the saine as anyone r®lse, to which witness replied that the tender would be placed in the wastepaper box. He- latetr moved the menda/tion to the incoming committee that the booth rights be sotd by aucition; that the eopurai&tee should see that the Hqiror wan true to label; and that if a man asked for n.- beef or Shandy he should get nothing leas than a medium unless -he Asked for a pony glass. Some speaker* -iJMntMiaidly declared that it was unfair to Whittle to discuss the matter, and that there was nothing *sr.ong vrith the liftHqr. To this witness replied that the speakers had their drinks in the stewards’ room, where the liquor was no doubt true to label, bdt hi- them wiidt about the poor public? Witness also mentioned other matter* conpewviug the management of the club, advocating that the club shdu.Td I:Sef) the' bird-cage* clear, as he thought that at the February meeting they alloWetl the stetito of the earth there, even to bookmakers and tfieir clerks.

He thought that if Whittle had been at the meeting thri'e vfotiTd have been nd case. He had. no reasdir or wish to make accusations agdirtsrt Whittle’s conduct of the booth's'. He had only ohe whisky in Whittfe’s hdOfh. Iti making the charge agitinst the committee regarding the method of handling tenders, he was acting on information received from a mem Mr of th‘e? committee about the 1910 tenders. AVitnWs vfras told that on that occasion the tenderer was riot, the one who put in thg highest price. He had this iri mirid' Uhefi hb told thechairman and that Lift information was different t 6 theirs. He Was. responsible for keeping spirits down to sixpence during thb tfrar titrie, arid ne did not think the other men in the business liked it. CROSS-EXAMINATION, Defendant- was cross-examined at length by Mr. Quilliam. I understand you bear the utmost feelirig of goodwill towards Whittle? —I bear no malice against him. I have often been up against him at meetings. You have got angry with him at. those riieetingS so has he, too. Do you denj’ that you made charges that Brookman and Whittle would let people in the back door while the other: hotels were closed '.'—No, I did rot. You wouldn’t trust the other hotelkeepers?—l Would not trust anybody about that goTt of closing. You have made a charge that No inn and Webster brought you faked tend-. > i figures?—They Were faked, ev dently. Who could have faked the figures? — The girl in the office, I suppose. \vhy should the figures be faked? — If they were not faked the members must have got hold of the wrong ones. I take it you Wbirid like to get the bo6th yourself?—No; too uiuch trouble. Why did you tender ?—lt was an arrangement between Waiter Little and myself.

I .expect you ate glad you did not it?—l doh’f know. It might have broken up tfie monopoly. You valud tKdffe privileges pretty highly?—They dre Worth more than £2*7o.

I thirih' you often discuss Whittle in your hotel' bar?—The same as he discusses me.

You discuss him often'?—No; he is in a public position, the same as mVself. I have often hoard you? name talked about in the bar, too. I love to bo talked abdxft; it is a cheap advertiseihcnt. , You had a whisky in Whittle s booth at llav.era; did VOii describe it as chained lightning?—No; I said it was firewater.

Do you say that the other witnesses in this case are wrong? —No; I never saw such a lot of fools of witnesses. They don’t Wm'to have got the right hang of the discussion. 'ln 1921 you still charge the committee with dishonesty?—lt is the same committee. You -can t get rid of them. There is only one way. We have all got to go there some day. Why did you say anything .n .that motion about true to label ?—I have travelled all over the North island, jmi know what sort of liquor is served uc

some booths. , You did not refer to the i urnnaM booth’—Ko. I knew that their objection to putting the booth up to action •i- for fear some ‘‘crook hotelkeeper might get it, so I P«t * h « onus on 7'“ committee. . . j suppose yon know that Whittle is an excellent 'hotelkeeper?—He mnst. be, if he has held a license for 27 years i«,nd onlv had ope conviction. lie hasn’t evep had that. —WeH, ne has been lucky, ~ If von had injured him would vriu do yonr’best to pot It i*lght?— CertnWly,, ’ Are von satisfied that you haven i injured'him?—l don’t consider I :have. Have von not often expressed ) iceliirns of hostility to Whittle!—False. Further evidence in support of’ defendant’s ease was given by Alfred Hi<r«s foreman builder, who wa\s the seconder of Emeny’s resolution dt the Jockey Club’s meeting. He did noit look on the motion as ap atta-k op (Whittle ' ' To His Honor: After the uVeet.pg sppio of the members, in discussing the

matter, expressed the opinion that Emeny had attacked Whittle. This concluded the evidence, and His Honor intimated that he intended to direct the jury that the question was one of qualified privilege, ant] that plaintiff would tp riffive fhat defendant was actuated by ipaljpe in making, the statements: 1 His Honor adjourned the Court at j 5.15. when counsel’s addresses had j been heard. lie intimated that he would sum up this morning. Judging from ' the large number in court he said the. I case was arousing some interest, and he advised the jury that in the meantime they should not allow anyone to discuss it with them.