ALLEGED LIBEL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1724, 14 April 1888, Page 3

ALLEGED LIBEL.

At the Supreme Court Dnnedin, on Wednesday, the c«ss of D'Albedyhll v. Brunton, claim £2OO for libel, was commenced. The amended statement of claim set forth that the plaintiff, Eliz«beth D'Albedyhll, is the wife of John Lethbridge D'Albedyhll, of Dunedia, bank clerk, and resides in Dunedin. The defendant is an evangelist, also residing in Dunedin. On or about the 11th A.ngu«t, 1886, at Dunedin, the defendant wrote and published of and concerning the plaintiff a letter, containing among other words the words set out in the schednle annexed, with the uuder'inmgs and interrogation point. The publication was false and malicious, tfor a second c«ase of action, plaintiff said there was a false and malicious publication of certain words on the 24th February, 1887 ; »n.J for a third cause of action thar there was a false and malicious publication of certain words on the 15th March, 1887. The plaintiff prayed to recover £SO in respect to the fiist cause of action, £SO in reject to the second, and £IOO in respect to the third. The following ia a copy of the schedule above referred to . Lower York Place, Dunedin, Aug. 11, 1886. Dear Col. Lethbridge,— # * * Let me say one thing at the outset, Nothing has raised poor D'Albedyhill [meaning the plaintiff's husband, the said John Lethbridge D'Albedyhill] so much in my estimation as the way he has kept back his wife's (if she be his wife !) disgrace. Not even to me did he hint at it, nor should I have known anything about the affair but for a casual word dropt which made me put certain questions e'icitin* little by littie the whole sad story. While Mas D'Albedyhill [meaning the plaintiff] has left no stone unturned to blacken his character both to myself and others, Mr D'Albedyhll has never breathed a syllable of that tfhicb was only too ready to his hand had he wished to blacken hers. Now to my sad story. Mrs D'Albedyhll had a child —a daughter-before her marriage to Mr D'Albedyhll. Though engaged to her for between two and three years she never made known the fact to him that she was a mother till two or three days bsfore the wedding [ths defendant thereby meaning that theaaid child waß illegitimate], . . . He : [meaniug a certain person named Dunn] goes on to say " My eyes are being opened "now; I can sympathise with you [meaning the said John Lethbridge D'Albedyhll] and all you married into the Garner family [meaning thereby that the plaintiff, who is a member of the Garner family, is so disreputable a character as to render it discreditable for anyone to be connected with that family]. . . . ." P.S.—lf Lizzie [meaning the plaintiff] does not look out she may goto jail for bigamy [meaning that the plamtiff in marrying the said John Lethbridge D'Albedyhll had committed the crime of bigamy]. Bui, to go on with my story. On June 7th, Mr D'Albedyhll wrote his wife (?) a letter [meaning by the interrogation point that the plaintiff was not th 6 lawful wife of the said John Lethbridge D'Albedyhll] ithinklhavo now given you all the facts of your coming to a fuller understanding of how mattera stand between poor Mr D'Albedyhll aud his wife, ifshebehis wife. As I think I said alrenoy, I am v«ry tstrongly nt opinion that she is not. . . . The fact is he has got into a morbd condition of thought and feeling, and needs if it were possible, a good rousiog oil* of it. He thinks everybody is against him, and no doubt this moist wretched state of mind has been brought about by the treacherj (I cat use no milder term) of one whom 1 am sure be onoa both loved and trusted, but who has now so cruelly betrayed him. I say now ought I not to have said she has discovered herself as hit betrayer from the wry first of their acquaintance, ?

In his amended statement the defendant denied that he wrote or published the words, underlinings, and interrogation point set out in the schedule. He ivli-o said that, if it be proved that he did write and publish the said words, underlinings, and interrogation point, he denied that he wrote or published th«m maliciously, but that he wrote them at the nquest of the plaintiff's husband, who wished to acquaint his bruther-iu-law and sister, Colonel and Mrs Let hbridge, with the particulars given in the letter, but was unable through ill-health to write himself. The case was continued on Thursday and yesterday.