TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXX, Issue 142, 17 June 1899, Page 2

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

When the court resumed this morning, Wesley Spragg was re-examined by Mr Cooper. He said he did not see the milk tested himself, but left it to his skilled employees. His Honor: Something was said about an opposition company being formed. When was it formed?

Mr Spragg: Recently. It was formed after this letter appeared.

William R. Holmes, public accountant, deposed that he was eemployed by Mr Spragg to examine the books of the Dairy Association. He made a careful and accurate examination of the accounts of the milk and butter supply for the season of 1897-08. That included the testing records. The books were accurately kept. The total quantity of 3.6 milk purchased was 38,040,490 lbs. On the basis of one pound of butter to 25 lbs of 3.6 milk, this should have produced 1,521,979 lbs of commercial butter. From the records and books 1,520,564 lbs of butter were actually produced, showing a shortage of 14151b5. He had seen the circular of October 13. That calculation of Mr Spragg's agreed with the books within a few pounds. Mr Campbell: How is the average percentage of milk paid for per season by the Babcock tester arrived at?

Mr Holmes made a calculation showing how the figures 3.5951 in the circular were arrived at.

William N. Sturges, farmer, of Obatipo, stated in answer to Mr Cooper, that he milked upwards of fifty cows. He had been one of the milk suppliers to the Dairy Association. He knew that prior to January 9, 1899, there had been some correspondence in the Waikato papers in reference to the Dairy Association.

Witness had read, the letter by 'Looker On' in the 'Waikato Argus' when it was published. He understood the letter to refer to Mr Spragg's business in connection with the milk supply. He concluded that if these allegations were true he could have no faith in further dealings with Mr Spragg. Mr Campbell: What allegations do you refer to?

Witness: The allegations contained in this letter: 'It is quite amusing to see the politic way in which Mr Spragg draws a red herring across the scent'; and also as to whether he had been doing the suppliers justice by his reading or mis-reading of the Babcock tester; and that he had been 'throwing dust in the eyes of the suppliers. 1

Mr Campbe'l: Had you rend the previous article in the 'Ai'gi.s' to which that letter referred ? Witness: Yes. I read them through. George Rigg, farmer, of Tc Piihi. near Te Awamutu, deposed to being aware of a controversy in the Waikato concerning the Dairy Association some, time prior to January last, lie saw the letter by 'Looker On,' which was the subject of this action, in the 'Waikato Argus.' He understood the letter to refer to the. Dairy Association, aud understood from it that Mr Spragg had been misleading the suppliers, or that he had not been paying them full value. He remembered some newspaper reference to milk being sent to Mr Pond for analysis. He could not say wheth.r In I, was the origin of the discussion. There was a considerable amount of discussion on the subject, both at the markets and in the newspapers.

Mr Campbell asked if there was anything contained in the letter of 'Looker On' which added anything new to the discussion.

Witness: It was a 'statemsi'it, not a discussion.

Mr Campbell: How could there be a statement on the subject without a discussion?

His Honor: Well, I don't know. If a man tells another 'You'.e a liar' that's a statement, not a discussion. (Laughter.)

Wm. C. Castleton, journalist, of Hamilton, deposed that be had read the letter referred to in the 'Waikato Arjrus.' He regarded it as a reflection on Mr Spragg and a serious allegation against him. Witness' impression from the letter was that if the allega-

tions were true Mr Spragg had been misleading and deceiving the milk suppliers. The remarks in the letter would be calculated to do Mr Spragg a lot of harm. This concluded the case for the plaintiff. His Honor asked if there was any chance of settlement.

Mr Cooper said he was quite prepared to meet Mr Campbell in a conference for a quarter of a.n hour.

Mr Campbell said he would prefer to open his case first and address the jury. He then addressed the jury and reviewed the evidence for the plaintiff. WITNESSES FOR THE DEFENCM.

Mr Campbell contended that in a matter of public interest like this there could be no libel unless there was malice, and there was no malice at all in what 'Looker On' wrote. He said he would then call a few witnesses for the defence.

William North, settler, deposed that he was a milk supplier to the Dairy Association, aud that he had read Mr Sprag'g's. circular. He took Mr Spragg's statement to mean that on the year's transactions he had produced 1,4151bs less butter than he ought to have done-

Mr Cooper: Did you not think that that letter was written for the purpose of injuring Mr Spragg in" his business?

Witness: There would be, two ways of looking at the letter—an outsider's aDd a milk supplier's. As a milk supplier, and as one of my tests led up to this—a test that went to Pond's—l was expecting something of the sort. Well, we'll treat it from an outsider's point of view.

Witness: Well, if I had been an outsider I should have thought it a rather strong letter myself.

Do you not think he charges Mfr Spragg with deception in his business?

No, I don't, think so. Do you not think it charged him with untruthfulness?

I think it was written to keep up the interest of suppliers in the way of keeping up the agitation concerning the tests. , What did you understand by the expression 'throwing dust in the eyes of the suppliers? Well I suppose it had something to do Avith his circular—it might have been that the tests had not been regular. The case is proceeding.