DISTRICT COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4230, 29 September 1892, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

THE SUNDER CASE, CuitKV. tfAYLOB, ' MABTERTON.-WEDNESDAY. (Before His Honor Judge Eobinßon.) The case was called on at 2.80, the following Jury being empanelled:— William Reed, George C. Sage, P. Holloway, and Richard Everden. All witnesses were ordered out of. Court.

Mr Beard, who appeared for the plaintiff, read the statement of claim as published by us yesterday. In bis address to the jury, Mr Beard said that Mr Clark had brought the present action for tho purpose of clearing up, onco and for all, the association of his name in any way with tho poisoning case, rather than for the amount of damages, A much larger amount might have been sued for had the action been taken to the Supreme Court,

Joseph Jessop (whose evidence was taken on affirmation) farmer, of Pahiatua, quite remembered the' poisoning caso, Saw Mr Naylor at the time and afterwards when he was getting better. Had been generally knocking about and giving assistance Had a conservation with Naylor about the poisoning when he was in bed, He said ''This is a devil of a bad job. I can't make out who should. do such a thing as this to me. I never did auybody any harm in my life." Afterwards when Naylor was convalescent again spoke to him outside his house. On this occasion Naylor said "that the only person who could have done it was Clark, as he had an enmity against Dickson. Prom what his (Naylor's) wife bad seen, he believed Mr Clark was the man who had done (be poisoning or connived at it." Everyone must bare known that Naylor meant the plaintiff. Knew that Naylor referred to the poisoning at Naylor's bouse. There could be no mistake about who was meant,

By Mr Tosswill: After my conversation with Naylor, I looked upon Oiark as a bad character, and from what I saw in the press and what Naylor told me he ought to have been arrested. Tbe second conversation between Naylor aud myself was in January. I did not see tbe. articles in the Woodville Examiner until after my conversation with Naylor. I do not wish to evade your questions. The conversation I allude to took place with Edward Naylor, I am referring to a conversation previous to the inquest. As far as my memory serves ire, it was a fortnight before, The laat conversation was on last Wednesday. In my opinion Naylor charged Clark with wilful murder nearly every day. 1 stored up a copy of the paper containing an article connecting Clark with the poisoning cases. lam a friend of Naylor's of course. I have certainly had a beer or two but am nono tho worse for that 1 hope, and can walk a plank as well as you! Ido not think it will do yon any good if I do tell yon what was said in June. If His Honor wishes it I will tell. About tbe Bth of June, as far as my memory goes, I saw .Naylor " going for" Clark iu the street. I said to him, "Lookhere, you bad better mind. Don't bother your head about it," This was all that passed. I have got a grand memory. (Witness here mado some objectionable personal remarks to Mr Tosswill.) When the conversation alluded to took place Benzie was not present and I do not remember seeing Teesdale. I have been trying to find out who killed these people but not because of the reward. To Mr Beard: Did not romember taking notice of what Naylor said to Clark when be was" going" for him, Samuel Groves, bricklayer, of Pahiatua, next gave evidence Met Naylor about the end of January, in front of McGiven's store, He was standing with four or five men. Naylor said Clark bad poisoned his family, and he did not care who heard him say so. On the following day witness was waiting for the Salvation Army (of which he was a member) when Naylor repeated pretty well tbe same words, Took Naylor's words to refer to Clark, the plaintiff in the present action,

By Mr Tosswill; Did not know the day, month, or year whon tbe conversation took place. Never had any words with Naylor. Quite friendly towards Mr Naylor, Did not think they had not spoken for two years, Did not recollect a dispute about 12s 6d, Naylor was talking to other people on the Sunday, but could not remember who they were, Took no notice of tbe matter at all, Was not interested in it, Did not know when it was.

Mr Tosswill: "Was it a year ago?" Witness; "Don'tknow." Mr Tosswill; " Was it two years ago?" Witness:" Don't know." Mr Tosswill; "Was it three years jago?" Witness: " Don't know at all."

To Mr Beard: The poisoning took place at Naylor's house, Was sure no animosity existed between liim and Naylor. Baw him last night and spoke to him. Naylor asked if be was getting his expenses paid. Told him he was not, Naylor then offered to give him a pound if be was short, He also said he would send witness to Carterton for the night. Thought that was a joke. Mr Tosswill interposed to say tbatl these statements were quite untrue.

Matilda Culver, residing at Pahiatua, deposed to being present at the wedding of Naylor's daughter, Recollected the poisoning affair and gave evidence as follows i—l went to help look after the Naylors and staved with them three weeks. About a week after I went there, Naylor was convalescent, I was usually in the kitchen,' I heard Mr and Mrs Naylor on one occasion talking about Mr Clark in the dining room which opens out the kitchen. Naylor said he was sure it was Mr Clark who did the poisoning. I understood him to mean the plaintiff, Mr Clark's name was handed about Pahiatua pretty freely at this time. I understood Mr Naylor to mean by his words that Clark bad done it deliberately and meant to poison them, I subsequently spoke to Mr Naylor, about, three weeks ago, and he said that if he had said anything be did not remember what it waß, or be did not know what he was saying. Previous to this I told him what I heard him cay to Mrs Naylor, By Mr Tosswill: It was a week after I went to Naylor's that tko conversation took,place. I was there as a friend lo nurse them, Mr Naylor was still suffering from the effects of the poison, Never spoke to Mrs Naylor or Pierce Lundon about the poisoning. Did not tell Mrs Naylor that my mother told me Clark had done the poisoning. Went to see my mother, hut did not have any conrergation with lier ebout the poisooipg,

If Mrs Naylor says I did I shall contradict her. IfLundon made a statement that I bad spoken to him abont the poisoning I should contradict it. I was doing my work, not listening, when I heard the conversation, I was folding dothes, Ido not know what else they were talking about. They were talking about half an honr, I am very friendly wi'h Mr and Mrs Clark, and came down with them yesterday, By Mr Beard: Was quite sum that I told Naylor the words I heard, I also heard his family referring to Clark by initials. Have only been in Olark'a house once. Neither Mr or Mrs Clark have ever Baid a word to tne to lead me to say anything but what was absolutely trie', I have not been primed by Clark. Archibald Stewart, grain dealer, of Fahiatua, recollected the poisoning cm, and deposed as follows: I had a conversation with Naylor about two months after it ocourred. I was passing bis shop one day when I stopped and the talk turned on the poisoning case, Naylor remarking that "if he had not belonged to the Masonic body he would not have got off." I understood Naylor to refer to Clark, and that ho meant that the Masonic body was sheltering Clark, who would otherwise have been arrested for the poisoning, Mr Clark's name has often been mentioned in Pahiatua as having done it deliberately. I cautioned Naylor to be careful in the statements he was making, as they were rash. Naylor then mentioned the case of a man in Woodville, who, he stated, had been sheltered in a similar manner. Buck statements had done Clark a great deal of harm. By Mr Tosswill: I am Master of the Fahiatua Lodge, I cannot say how many Masons there are in Pahiatua, I say that Naylor meant Clark. I kuew it by his manner. I did not suspect Clark myself, Clark was never in my mind as being the guilty porsoh,

Charles Benzie, of Mangatainoko, deposed : It was a matter of common talk in Pahiatna that the poisoning had been deliberately done, and the name of one person was freely bandied about, That person was the plaintiff, Mr Clark, I saw Naylor. when he was in bed, He made no direct charge to me, All Naylor said.was "If Dickson had not been here it would not have happened," or words to that effect. Idid not know what he meant, Never heard Clark's name mentioned in connection with the poisoning, until the Thursday night, when one, John Hoar, a milkman, told me that Clark was blamed, Afterwards by haying heard this, I thought Naylor referred to Clark, but unless I had heard it bandied about the street, I should never have connected Clark with it. 1 told Naylor what was being said in the town, and ho told me that Clark and Dickson bad fallen out, The conversation was, I think, on a Haturday, Naylor also stated something about Miss Clark and Dickson falling out, I took it that Naylor referred to Clark in tlio words, " If it had not been for Dickson, etc," after I heard what was going on outside. There was more talk outside than in. I did not hear Mr Naylor speak to Mr Dawson at all, I did say to Mr Naylor that an apology would hush things up, Naylor replied that he had never said anything to apologise for.

To Mr Tosawill: Clark's name had been bandied about in connection with the affair. Had heard his name mentioned as being on bad terms with Mrs Dickson, and also heard her name mentioned iu the same way. I heard Ularko's name, previous to the Saturday. Naylor's words might have referred to Miss dark. 1 could not tell. It might have referred to either. I was eight days with tho Naylor's, attending on Mr Naylor and some ol the others. I saw him twenty times both night and day, and will swear I never heard him mention Clark's name in connection with the case. I did not ask Naylor who he meant. When I told him what the people said about Clark ho said " him" and Diokson had a row.

At this stage the Court adjourned until 10 o'clook on Thursday morn' tag.

THURSDAY. On the District Court resuming this morning, the case Clark v. Naylor was proceeded with. Samuel Groves, re-called by Mr Beard, said that he was not taking particular notice and could not give the exact words used by Naylor, His own opinion, formed from what Nay« lor said, was that he meant Clark had done the poisoning deliberately, By Mr Tosswill: I don't know how far I was from Naylor when he was talking, I did not take notice how long he was talking. It might have beon a week or six weeks, I believe it was somewhere about last Christmas, I don't know who the other four were. I bad enough to do to look after my own affairs, I believe that is all I hoard him say, Naylor was exoited at the time. I remember scarcely anything just now, In fact I'm not interested in the case at all. You don't waut me to swear a lie do you 1 My mind is confused jnst now, and I cannot remember anything more,

Mr Board, by permission of the Court, repeated the words used by the witness yesterday. Witness said he was positive thoy wero correct, The foreman of the jury asked if witness remembered the name of any one person who was present when the words were spoken by Naylor, Witness did not remember, bavin? taken no notice at all.

Joseph Jeesop, re-called, repeated his statement of yesterday as to Nay* lor'B remarks,

By Mr Tosswill : The words Naylor used were to the effect' that Clark and Diokeon bad a grievance about business matters, and it was for the purpose of getting at Dickson. I told Naylor be ought to be very oareful and not let the thing get about, Thought that Naylor said a littlemore tbau he told tho Court yesterday. Naylor said something about his wife seeing a man with a brown "hard hitter" going up the passage at the festival. His memory had been refreshed this morning that was why he recollected things be did not think of yesterday, Was half an hour at Mr Naylor's bedside. Thought it was Mr Benzie who let him in, Went as a friend to see Naylor. J, P. Clark, tho plaintiff in the present action, was next called and stated: I have been carrying on bosiness in Fahiatua about five years, I recollect tho poisoning case and the matters connected with it, My name wsb mentioned but I heard no one else connected with it, By Mr Tosswill:—l did not hear that my sister's name was connected with it. I remember that at the inquest evidence was given that' my Bister said (referring to Mrs Dixon) "that i she had a chance Bhe would pfiieon, the old b——." Mm® was made' to me. I

believe, in the Woodville Examiner. I have read the artiole quoted, I did not reply to the article. The articles were inspired by Naylor. I can Bwear that MrHaggengot the information from Naylor at his bedside. I am prepared to bring evidence to prove it. I heard it from others, I heard you (Mr Tosswill) state that the Woodville Examiner charged me"" with poisoning Dickson. I did not boar Jessop say so; Naylor inspired the lartioles and originated the slander. L jean bring evidence to prove it. was a difference in business matters between Mr Diokson and myself.' . Considerable argument took place at this stage as to the admission, in : evidence, of a certain letter written by the plaintiff to the late Mr Dickson, |His Honor ruling that the letter was not adrnissable.

Crossexaminalion oontinued.—ldid make the statements contained in the i letter. I admit writing it, The Istateinents in evidence refer to matters whioh are alleged to have oocurred in January and February last. I have acted on the advioe of my solicitor in not taking proceedings before. By Mr Beard: I have been aoting I on advice throughout and have volun* teered to give any information to the police. I have courted enquiry in every way, going out of my way to do so, No one has been manly enough to oharge me to my faoe with being the culprit,' I was not to be drawn by the Woodville Examiner. • Patrick Spillane was oalled but difo not appear. This closed the oase for the plaintiff. Mr Tosswill addressed the jury, staling that they came to deny that any of the statements alleged in tho olaim were made. He should ask for a nonsuit first of all on the ground that the exaot words must beset out in the statement for claim. He also proposed to argue that the inuendo cannot make a person certain who was not certain before. The statements made by the witnesses were not the statements mode in the disclaim, In an action for slander the very words used must be set forth.

His Honor reserved deoision on the point until 2 p.m.