Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGES! LIBEL.

(BY TELEOKAFH. — PKESS ASSOCIATION.)

I Wellington, this day. •Jhe hearing of the libel action brought by Mr Bell, M.H.R., against the weekly journal "Fair Play," tor saying he was cxi hilarated by something other than his victory on the night of his election, concluded late yesterday afternoon. The plaintiff's evidence was a denial thab he was exhilarated by liquor. Though supported by many prohibitionists, he was not a teetotaller. Possibly be had had a glass of champagne at diuner on election day, bub not more. He thought he wae the calmest person in the room when the result was made known. In thanking the electors, he said the election had brushed aside the scum and froth of political talk, referring to what had been going on generally on the platforms and at the street corners. It was a perfectly proper speech.

No witnesses were called for the defence. Counsel having addresnod the jury, His Honor summed up. He said, with regard to froth and scum, tha defendant had misrepresented what the plaintiff had actually said. If imputation of exhilaration simply meant that Mr Bell was gay and cheerful, then no harm waa done ; but if it meant that he was ao much under the influence of liquor as to use language that was not decent, fchon, no doubt, the imputation was calculated to injure him with his supporters belonging to the temperance party. As to the plea of fair comment on publio men, it had been ruled in all the Courts of New Zealand thab fair comment must be comment, and must nob auggesb as facts things that wero unbrue.

After fifteen mtuutos retirement, the jury returned ioto the Court, and asked what would bo the smallest amount of damages fchub would' canty costs.

His Hoaor Bald ho could not answer fclmb question, nnd the jury thereupon re* turned a verdict for the plaintiff with £1 damages. Sir H. Stout asked for costs.

His Honor said the amount was sufficient to carry, oopfcp, and na there had, without doubt, been a libel, he would glvo costs on the lowest scale.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18940206.2.8

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 32, 6 February 1894, Page 2

Word Count
352

ALLEGES! LIBEL. Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 32, 6 February 1894, Page 2

ALLEGES! LIBEL. Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 32, 6 February 1894, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert