FALSE STATEMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 62, 15 March 1938, Page 15

FALSE STATEMENT.

" NO MERE INNUENDO." WOMAN PROVES CASE. . UNION OFFICIAL SUED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) GREYMOUTH, Monday. Several well-known unionists figured in an action brought in the Magistrate's Court this afternoon by Sophia 'Elizabeth McLagan, of the New Zealand Federation of Labour (Mr. W. D. Taylor), against John Rea, a member of the Greymouth executive of the Westland Timberworkers' Union (Mr. J. W. Hannan), alleging defamation of character and claiming £100 damages. After lengthy evidence had been heard, Mr. R. E. Ferner, S.M., found the case proved, and subsequently counsel announced that plaintiff had* no intention of making money ont of the action, and she and her husband would be satisfied if Rea paid the costs. The statement of claim set "out that defendant falsely and maliciously made statements concerning an alleged improper relationship between plaintiff and a man named Doyle, formerly her husband and subsequently divorced. Mr. Taylor, in outlining the case, said no doubt defendant intended no reflection on plaintiff, but was making a direct hit at Doyle, who was president of the Timberworkers' Union. The incident occurred after a meeting when the secretary of the union, F. L. Tnrley, and defendant were discussing union matters on the street. It was in the course of these conversations that tbi» statement was alleged to have been made in the presence of Albert Victor Hill, also a member of the union executive. Statement By Plaintiff. Plaintiff said she had not seen or heard of Rea previously and knew no reason why he should make the statement. She had nothing against Doyle, who occasionally visited her home. Turley said that at the meeting referred to there was discussion over a telegram sent to the Prime Minister by himself and Doyle, which Rea opposed. He met Rea after the meeting, when Rea said the motion he had moved was

that the names of the executive members and how they voted be published. Witness pointed out the inadvisability of publication, but Rea said he would publish the names himself. He was annoyed, and got excited over Doyle's attitude and then made the statement which was the basis of. the action. Witness said he was surprised and asked Rea what he meant, the latter repeating the statement.

Mr. Hannan, addressing the Court, said the parties were unknown to one another and there was no reason why Rea should defame Mrs. McLagan in any way. The whole conversation had to be taken into account. Innuendo was not proof.

Defendant admitted he had said that, although divorced from Mrs. McLagan, Doyle visited har and her husband, and they were quite friendly. He denied making the statement alleged, and said he had no intention of reflecting on Mrs. McLagan's character nor of offending Doyle. "Very Gracious Action." The magistrate said he had no hesitation in saying that the statement was made and was no mere innuendo, but had a plain defamatory meaning. Defendant's version was invested with the language and vehemence that often obtained at brisk union meetings and came very near the statement alleged. When Mr. Taylor announced that the McLagans did not want money the magistrate said he thought it was a very proper attitude. Mr. Hannan said he thought it was a very gracious action and he would advise his client to accept it. He repeated that defendant had no intention of defaming Mrs. McLagan. The case was adjourned sine die.