ALLEGED SLANDER.

Auckland Star, Volume XVII, Issue 219, 17 September 1886, Page 2

ALLEGED SLANDER.

Quite an interesting case of alleged criminal libel was heard at tho Police Court this afternoon before Mr H. G. Seth Smith, It M. Tho informant was a rosident of Mount St. Mary named William Green, and the defendant a quondam friend named James Kay. According to tho information road by tho Clerk of the Court, Jamos Kay, bnok-koopor foi tho Now Zealand Printing nnd Publishing Company (Limited), was charged with contriving, and unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously intouding to injure, viliify, and prejudice the said informant, and to doprivo him oE his good namo, fame, credit, and reputation, and to bring him into public contempt', scandal, infamy, and disgrace, on or about tho Ist of Septombor, ISBB, unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously did write and publish and causo to bo writton nnd published a fulso, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel, in tho form of v letter directed to ono Henry Sankey, containing divers falao, scandalous, and malicious and defamatory matters and tilings of and concerning the said informant, according to tho sonso and effect following, that is to

Sir,— Being awaro that you ore claimed by Mr Wm. Uroeu, ofllarKreaves-strtet, Poneonby, as a friend and acquaintance, and as I have had some exoecdinKlP unpleasant oxparlonces of his fiiendHliip, I think It is mv duty to warn you of him. He tas swindled mo out of £100 and more, and in trying to defend his action he has attempted also to slandor mo. but without euccees. I havo challenged him for twelve months back to give a fair arbitration of tho diiforonoo between ua; but ho always shuttles, nssuraiaK. because it is of no consoquouco to him. he should not bo troubled, as ho is a man of too «rint importance to argue on such h paltry matter. I have to himself, and I now to you, call him a Bwindier, a thief, a liar, a enealc, a cowardly blackguard, and a oontouiptible ecoundrol. I have, in his own hou6O, heard bis wifo say to him that ho could mix with the lowest in the land and teach thun soiiitaiDK vilo they did not know bofuro. I am bookkeeper at tbo ollioe of tho Ntiw Zoalmid Printing aud Publishing Co., Wyudhain street. I bog to subrcribo mysolf, yours truly, James Kay.

Ho, the said JamcH Kuyo, well-knowing tho said defuinutory libel to bo false to the Croat dainago, scandal, and disgrace of tho said informunt, otc, etc.

MrThco. Cooper appeared for the informant, and Mr Laiahloy for tho dofendant. Mr Laishley, who appeared tor tho dofondant, Huid that ho recognised that it was not competent for him at that stage to go into tho queation of tho truth of the allegation, or as to whothor the defendant was justified or not in his action. Mr Coopor said that this ca?o was poculiarly moro of a ministerial than judicial ono for tho Bench. Thoy simply had to piovo that thote was a primafacie case of iibol. Vn this point there could bo no doubt, as thore was a deliberate attompt on tho part of the do fendant to defame tho plaintiff to ono of his friends. Tho first paragraph disclosed a malicious attempt to defame, and tho second paragraph accusing tho plaintiff of being a swindler was in itself libellous.

William Greon deposed that he had beon a solicitor, but being of independent meaiiß hiul not practised in New Zealand. Had known Mr Kayo, tho defendant, for tho lust four years, during which tinio they had many trunifUL'tiutiH together. He thereforo waa woll acquainted with his handwriting. On August 2nd ho received tho document produced, enclosing a promissory note fer i'.'iCO, This letter contained a copy of a letter which ho threatened to sond to witness's friends. The writing of that letter was that of Mr .Tames Kayo. Tho lettor was signed, " The book-keeper of tho Now Zealand Printing and Publishing Company." Tho defendant had repeatedly addressed letter* to him ns "Lawyer Green," "Brown, of Southampton," and "Smith, of Newton." Roth Mr Sankoy and Mr Elkin were frionds of witness. Mr Green wished to add that ho did not owe tho man anything.

Mr Laisbley objected to this evidence, and it wus struck out of tho deposition.

JJonry Sankoy, a gentleman living on hie means, deposed that ha resided in Soy-mour-ssroet, Poneonby. He had once met tho defendant at Mr Green'a rosidonce. On tho beginning of Soptembor bo recoived a letter signed "James Kaye." It waa exactly similar to tho one already in court. Witness merely road it to his wife, and then put it in tho fire. The writing was similar to tho letter produced, and marked 810. On tho Bth of September ho recoivod a lottor from tho defendant to tho olTect that tho writer would have oxpocted him, as a friend, to have called upon Mr Greon and attemptod to persuade him to take legal proceedings. The writer Btuted that ho had little doubt that ho would soon hoar of Mr Green absconding from Auckland. That letter witness roccivod in reply to his answer to tho former, in which ho stated that he was surprise 1 to hear that Mr Green's actions had boon dishonest, and affirming that ho had always found him a gentleman in hia dealings with him.

Mr Cooper eaid ho would call Mr Elkin, who would produce an oxact transcript of letter receivod by Mr Sankey. Ho considorod that would bo ovidonco showing the malice of the defendant in a determined attempt to injuro Mr Greon by spreading similar libels.

Mr Laishley said that ho must submit that Mr Elkin's evidence was not admiss iblo. Ho quoted lioscoe, page 87, seventh edition, to support his contention. His learned friend was really attempting to give evidence of entirely another libel. His Worship held that any evidence was admissible that tended to elucidate the transaction.

Jonathan Elkin, gentleman, residing in Wallaco-etreot, Ponsonby, deposed that he had once seen Mr Kaye. On the 31st of August witness recoivod a lottor signed James Kaye, containing etateaonte refering to Mr Green, with whom witness wus also acquainted. Subsequent to proceedings being taken at Court he roceired a lettor from Mr Kayo to tho following effect :—" I seem to hare stung Mr Green into action at laet. I got a summons to answer for libol bofcre Judge Seth Smith on Friday, the 17th of September. '

Mr Cooper Raid that was all the evidence he proposed to call at the prosont stage of tho proceedings.

Mr Laiebley said that of course he could not addross the Court on behalf of the dofondant. Any dofonce that hia oliont might havo—and he could say that thoy had an ample defonce—would therefore bo reserved for the Suprome Court.

His Worship committed the prisoner to take his trial at the next criminal sittings of the Supreme Court holden in Auckland. On the application of Mr LnUhloy, bail waa allowed the dofendant in £50, and tw» surotios of £25 each.