DISTRICT COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3686, 13 December 1890, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

MASmioS—HtIDAY. (Before liisljonor District Judgo - Bobinson), Sedcole y Reese." . Crosß-examiuod by MrPownall, Mr Sedcolo snid there were two parties in Pabiatua, ,the publicans . and the public, the former wishing no increase bat the latter fighting for an increase of licenses. The reason lie favoured an increase was that he thought; it preposterous the whole community should be ruled by two publicans, At a publio meeting prior to the licensing eleotioD, it was decided to support those who favoured the granting of licenses to Hughes and ChHstianson. He gave no pledge , that lie would support the granting of licenses to these two, but had been nominated because he had said he would support the granting of further licenses, as.the only effeotual way to.fight the publicans. He thought it would be a' disgrace for' any committee to be elected which would grant a license to suoh'a person as Hughes. ; He did not consider it proper to ally himself to any party. The expenses of the trip to Wellington on Court business had been oolleoted by the public party, and he did not refuse to take from them his share, The niejlit before the adjourned sitting of the Licensing Committee heseflt for Mr Wilson to discuss licensing matters, Messrs Dawson and Naylor were also present, They went through the Act and lie showed: where it would bo improper to grant a license to Mr Hughts, Ho did hot at that meeting say to Wilson that they, had decided to oppose Hughes' liceßso, because by 60 doing they would obtain tlie sup* port of the publicans and their friends in the Town Board election.. He had never given Wilson to understand anything to this effect, He had said they might be sure of receiving the' votes - up to Stewart's and Crewe's under any circumstances. 1 He wished to maintain the honor of the town by refusing ' to grant licenses to disreputable persons, Mr Wilson might have said, " I don't think you will get the publican's support by such au action," He had an opinion that by refusing the license he would receive a certain amount of support in the Town Board election, but this did not influence him in voting again3t the license, The last meeting of the publio party was held in the publio hall,' A Mr Eiger was present, but he 'did not remember telling him that lie intended voting for the granting of Hughes' and Christiansen's licenses, Ho had been promised £SO if ho would refuse to grant a license to more than one hotel, but lie hod never been offered £SO to vote against Hughes. He had refused to have anything to do with tho money, and it was only on the persistent opposition cf the publicans he had told the Committee what had happened, In his conversation with Eager he did not say he had received a bonus, Eager said, when leaving, " Will you share your bonus with me?'' Witness replied, "Oh, no, I'll give it to tho library when I get to,". Ho had never said that he was anxious to revenge hioißelf upon certain persons, including his brother, and on this aocount had refused to grant the license. His action with regard to the license was commented upon in the leading columns of the paper, and among a section of tho community. It was rumourod be iiad been bribed to vote against the license, The party in opposition to the public were successful in their efforts, and be worked with them to some extent, to keep himself posted up on what was transpiring. The letter of Mr Keeso was damaging, and it was untrue that he had received a consideration, He was one of those who granted Christiansen's license,' Christiansen was occupying a house belonging to his wife, fjis acquaintances and friends Had apparently a sufficiently diseased imagination to beliovo Mr Reese in preference to him, He had never challenged Mr Eeese to put the matter before the publio in the Town Board election. He left it to the Towu Board election as a test of public feeling, and had it not been for the defendant tampering with the electors ho would have succeeded in this election. Unfortunately the illiterate part of the community of Pabiatua had the weight, and they put him at the bottom of tho poll. His business as an.insurance agent bad been affected, He did not canvas the electors r iu the Town Board election, as dic( his opponents, neither did he canvna in tlie licensing election, In & pecuniary senso it was no advantage of his to be returned to the Town Board, He thought, however, that had he got in he would have in all probability stopped the squandering qf fates. It was in this respept he was tho loser of £95, ByMrTosswill; The money for expenses was oollected before the second nomination. When he told the Committee about the £SO it was simply for their information as n party, It was solely on account of the reading of the Act and the police report that he refused the application of Hughes for a license. He was not influenced by anything Mrs Hughes said in refusing t{\e license, .The Jury: AYaa the private chapojer o.f % Christiansen, irreproachable? i Witness: Ho was perfection compared with the other, man, The Jury: Wero his premises all that were necessary to comply with the Act ? Witness: Thg police report was favorable, find rose no objection, M r Pownull; Was not Mr Christiansen as intoxicated as possible for two days before tho granting of the license? Witness: I saw him the worse, for liquor on the afternoon preceding the licensing meeting, Charles Cooper, constable at Pabiatua, deposed that he knew Sedcole and Kcceg, He also "knew Christian atul. Hughes, Ho had appeaved at the sittings of the Palliatua Licensing Committed when Christiansen and Hughes applied for their licenses. He had never objected to the granting of Christiansen's' license, Ho had, however, objeoted to Thops Hughes' application on account of his intemperate habits and on account of the. 'condition of the house, whiijh, its surroundings, was in a state o{ tilth and dilapidation, The stables were a-.mere wre<?k, The Committee on the day of the meeting went and inspected tho promises themselves, and found it in the condition in which he stated. The applicant was not there, he was the worsefor drink. Witness told the Committee that lie had seen Hughes in a state of. indication, The application Wfis 'adjourned, and op the adjourned hearing it was jefysgd, Mr Sedcole, who was fo.tty.saii\ stated M' s4' U think, from t|pj iioijce

loport, and'from what lies had Sounj: the license should ho granted; Witness did not consider Hughes fit to hold a licenso from his intomporatorlmbits.-. Ho had read Mr Reese's letter in the Pahiatua Star, the comment upon which was decidedly uncomplimentary to Mr Sedcole,, It was after the ftyle of two parties in war, : some/for the letter and bomb against. : 7: By Mr Pownall :Tho house of Mr Hughes Was larger than. that ot Mr Christiansen at the time of the licenaing,Meeting, He believed a license would have beeii granted to Hughes if he bad cleaned up the house. It was not so tniioh the housa as/ tho nan he objeutcd to, Mr Christiansen was intoxicated two days before the licensing meeting, . but this was an exception to the,rule! •He understood the piiblio; feeling pretty well .in Pahiatua, but he did not know that the publicans were raking up this action, Mr Sedcole was commended by one portiou of the community, and opposed by aiiothpr, before the letter was.written, . He bad beard a]l kinds allegations ■ immediately after the licensing meeting. : . Mr Sedcole, recalled, said, in reply to Mr Pownall, that had been talked about by many. The pnblicnQs bud' never urged him to bring this action against Mr Eeese, He had consulted, his own family only. Mr Pownall; That is, your mothers, your coiisins, and your amitfl, 'Witness: That is so, ■ Honor: i would like to ask how many mothers, for'the enlightenment of the jury. (Laughter.) Mr Pownall: Well, mothers and mothers-in-law..

: W.-W, McCardle, sworn, staled lie was a resident of Pahiatua, and had been chairman of "the- former-Town Board., He knew Mr Reese and'Mi Sedcole, He had seen the letter appearing in' the Pahiatua " Star'!' and-a number of the pnblio seemed to think Mr Sedcolo had noted a vory bad part, He believed 41ie letter affected M r Sedcole in the late Town Board election, because a 1 number seemed to think it was true, Had this letter .'not appearod. Mi; Sedcole would in his. opinion have been elected to the Town Board. The letter also afiected -Mr] Sedcole'B reputation, Alexander Black, proprietor of the Pahiatua" Star," produced the original letter Bent him by Mr Rccbc which was published on. August lith! When Mr Reese brought him the letter ho called attention to a certain portion of it, which be considered was uusafe to publish. The part he referred to-was that about the consideration of having received an amount, which witness thought meant an amount of money, As Mr Reese had a different opinion to himself he allowed the letter to appear. The letter appeared on Mr Reese's responsibility, By Mr Pownall: Mr Reese did not appear to think lie (witness) had put the right construction on the letter. John Gregory, storekeeper, of Pahiatua, deposed to knowing the parties in the present action. Ho remembered seoing Mr Reese's loiter in the Pahiatua " Star," and was surprised to see it, He heard from the outside public that the letter had damaged Mr Sedcole, and personally he thought it affected him in the Town Board election. From what he heard the letter had also affected Mr Sedcole's private reputation, By Mr Pownall: He gathered from the lettQf that Mr Sedcolo* had received some* remuneration! Ho did not knoft what he was in the •' box for, ho had never spoken to Mr Sedcole about the case, To the Coutl: As he saw no contradiction to tho letter in the paper he was almost bound to believe it was true, William Stewart, publican of Pahiatua, stated that. ho knew Sedcolo and Reese. He had seen the letter in tho ' Star," and he had heard his customers say that unless Sedcole contradicted it it would injure him as a publio man. His opinion was that the letter might have lost him a good few votes in the Town Board election. By Mr Pownall: Mr Sedcole received his support in the Town Board election, and the letter did not affect him, He did notltnow whether Mr Sedcole had canvassod lor the eleotiou, Ho could-not swear that! Mr Sedcole would have got in had it' not been for tlio letter. - The pecuniary value of a seat on the Town Board was very small, Mr Pownall submitted - that the plaintiff should be non-suited in this case. Tho action had boea brought on aocount of what the plaintiff took to bo an inuendo, and as no special damage had been shown the whole case mutjt fail, There was not tho slightest evidence to Bhow tjiat tlio plaintiff had lost tho election in consequeuco of the letter. Mr Tosswill contonded that there was a oase for the jury. It had been shown in evidenco that through the appearing of the letter in public print the Town Board election had- been influenced. ' The Court intimated - that it thought thero was sufficient evidence to demand a defence, V

For tho' defence, Mr Pownallbeld that this was a trashy action, trumped up 'to, injure a party. Mr Sedcole had distinctly pledged himself to rote,for the granting of a license to-Hughe hut just' before the licensing committee, meeting had allowed himself to be tampered with. Sedcole had ractcd in a moat disgraceful manner, and anything that might have been written about him was justified, Alexander Kecse, sworn, deponed he was a contractar residing at Pahiatua, He took an active interest in the election of the Licensing Committee, and it was generally known that Christiansen's and Hughes' licenses would be applied fjr, The publicans were against this, but a party was formed to secure the return of-those favorable to it, A. first meeting was held in Mr Sedcole's bouse, when it was decided to nominate five men who were agreeable; to grant two, if not three now licenses. Messrs Sedcole, Naylor, ;J, Hughes, Wilson, and himself wore the Svo nominatod, They considered it very unwise to nominate men other than those of integrity, and it was agreed that they Bbould grant licenses Ito two, if not three applicants, if asked for. A. few days elapsed, and it was decided that his name and that of Mr Wilson should be struck off. Only three therefore went to; the poll, 1 This was on the suggestion Qf Mr Sedcole, but witness opposed It.. The three were elected, but the election was upset. A meeting w,Vs afterwards hold, the, result being that a new committee was nominated, amongst the number being-Messrs Sedcole and Naylor. It was decided that the wisest thing to do was to pledge themselves to grant licenses to all who might -apply. A public meeting was hold in tbo Town Ilall, and every Oiwdidato uoininaled was

to support the granting of Lnewjicenscs. Mr llaylor gave them /. ■to understand that, lie had been l ', i,offered a big cheque by Mr Spillano if. lie.yoted against Hughes' license, Ho Jiad'refuaed to accept it, however, At . the meeting in the Town Hall Albert ' Sedoole said he had also been offtred I a cheque for, £SO from Mr Spillane, Ho gave them to understand that ho had -refused, was ; assured ■ --i by Mr Henry Sedcols, in the presonco ; of plaintiff; that all iwh'o werei nbtninj l . . ated .had pledged.. themselves.to voto, for an increase in licenses. On the ■ day following.the public Meeting tho oommittee waSieleofe'di. .He.was very- - rauoli. disappointed .that ■; the license 1 He' was ,partly prepared ' for the 'casting vote of Mr Sedcole, inconsequence of .what he tvis told. He was'surprised at thewayin which Sedcoleand Naylov voted; on iaccpuat of their;pledge..-; Witaess did n6t *ns!c Sedcolo for ad ; explanation, Wheri.he ■came out of Meeting he; isaidj 'f 1/ suppose we'll got some. black looks- now," Witness replied, « r There's.nadoubt of He did ) an articlcTMn, jonf'vtbe/ • subject, jMr jjßlaok, ; friend:to th|. and 'L'ad^v" assisted tbe publicaii's/lfedy-not tl remember Mr BI«ok obpf} to'llie letter when be took', it t6'him; iWheii- ■ he. wrote the letter he bad tietfactof Sedcole being;offered;: the money. in.,' h|s jiiihd, but ho carefully avoided making ;to it. : Mr ; ■■ Sedcole, he knew; hnd been "promised the support of the 'publican's in the ; lown Board elections, At the timo he wiote the. letter -he j had-very • ;MingfM»lili;A bedcole, His objecting in writing Ras to disabuse the,public mind of tho; ■ correctness of tbe article published. The letter, he thought, excitcd'ftjgood ' deal of comment, One of the " Committee, in the .• Court,' - had saidi' 1 that there were riot words ;in the > England language lb; _cxpress ; his feelings on the conduct . of Messrs Reese arid Sedcole.: iHis 1 dpmraQnts : bad not done as much harm 'ss■ Mr Sedcole's own conduct, r The plaintiff th 1 tt^H^ the plaintiff had been influenced by promises, In his opinion Mr Sedcole . m in the Jleotion because he did not carry out' us pledge, By Mr Tosswill: He did not think ■hat the statement that Mr Hughes ms drunk and the house was in a llthystate 'sufficientsprevent J ,he Committee granting a license. Lbe .statements of Gonstablo Cooper vorountrue,"He had gone through >•' ihe building and if was not filthy. * [flie bad, .been on the Committee he rould have • granted', a licenie,to Jughes. Mr Hughes stated that -he ■ nft." hocussed" by one of the publi- ... ans and made drunk.. Oa ; th"e> •videnco before tho Committee, had ' ie not seen the premises, Ije would iot have granted the license. Mr ' sedcole was pledged to vote for tho,". ''anting of the Hcbmo, although there--rere contingencies under which ha • ' hould not have dono aoi He ton- '' idered Mr Sedcole was bound by liia 'ledge, . '

At this stage the Court: adjourned '' till next day,, ' SATURDAY. Mr Reese was subjected to a lengthy ' and sever# cross-examination, by,Mr ' Tosswill, but his evidence 1 was'only a • corroboration of what had already been adduced; y •,^ e ,"2'^ ec ' co ' o i brother,of ,th.e/ - . plaintiff, deposed'that a pledge'hat! been made by Mr A. W. Sedcole to vote {or the granting of the license to Hughes. _ He had fought against his. ; brother in tho Town . Board election - owing to his actions. The letter hail ■ j nothing to do.with tlio result of the-f' election. ■ ■; "'•■■■ '.: Edward Maylor, called for the.;' plaintiff, stated that -he was present bedcole's house, and it was then " said that Hughes was not a suitable man to he licensed, At the Town Hall meeting he did not hear Mr Sedcole make any pledge.. To: Mr Pownall: Hucjhes might have got Jiia licenso if his house had been fit, but he was hanging over ft fence drunk iVhen his application wan heard. The Court then adjourned till two o'clock,