LEVIN NEWSPAPER CASE.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 305, 18 September 1908, Page 9

LEVIN NEWSPAPER CASE.

- PLAINTIFF AWARDED £225. -' (BT TEtEGBAPB.—SPECXiL COKKESPONDEKT.) Palmerston North, September 17. At ,'the Supremo Court this morning, in tho ease D. S. Papworth' v. tho Horowhonua Publishing Co., Ltd., a claim for (a) £500 damages,, (b) £177 6s. unpaid salary, ■and (c) £150 money advanced with interest, " .at ,6 per cent., was continued before Mr. Justice Chapman and a jury. Mr. Myers, instructed by Mr. Jackson, ' appeared for plaintiff, and' Mr. JX M.Findlay, instructed by Mr. Park, for tho defendant company. N. J. Bennington gave evidence - concern- , ing. a conversation he had with the plaintiff 0(1., May 1 relative to the purchase of tho paper by witness, plaintiff asking witness to join_ him in starting an opposition paper in Levin, as tho company had received an offer for the paper and were likely to sell. Witness .replied that tho offer referred to 0110 tliat witness'had iuade to tho company on behalf of himself and his brother-in-law; Clc-' land: Plaintiff thereupon said that if 110 had known this 110 would not have gone so far in the matter, and expressed his willingness to join in the' purchase of the paper, witness replying that, it was a family affair aiid' could not bo arranged. Later in tho day witness met plaintiff, and as a result'of further, conversation' witness drafted'out a I second offer' to tho company wherein it was expressly, implied that the business was to be handed over as a going concern, free of all encumbrances.. On May 14 Craig wired | witness that pla.intilf was coming to town aiid'riot to give him any information. This tf'ak .relative to. a conversation witness had l had;with. l Craig.,in Wellington over the original; offer, in March previous. 111 crossexamination, witness admitted that the plaintiff'.had been perfectly frank with him in conversation, and had done nothing which seemed damaging ,to the company's interests. Witness had a later interview with plaintiff, also wii.li Craig relative to' the purchase of tho i! paptirt'-'-"-' James Knight, present editor-manager of tho "Manawatu,,Farmer,'.'-gave evidence to tho cft'ect that, in, his. opinion, plaintiff was not capable of correctlyestimating in the jobbing, orders, "but was a. very goou man to work for:'all the same; and might have special ability as a literary journalist. It was the opinion.-of witness that sixpence per inch for paragraph advertisements was too low. - Witness had not complained of sixpence per inch being charged for a prohibition advertisement be&iuse one of the directors was 111;terested in thq ;salo of spirits. Witness. did, .hot .suggest-that, hp was a better man than -plaintiff, but considered he had put tho company's. affairs'.upon.a paying basis. ..Frank James Merson, printer riiachinist, ; stated that'since plaintiff had been released from tile management a great deal more wort ;had'; come into the. jobbing department, necessitating a great deal of overtime being put in by the hands now engaged, whereas . 'formerly ",*it - was!- 'slack and'hard - to "kill 'time'.'" ; j;.' , " J.. H. 1 Soutiiwick, chemist, was called, but Mr. 'Myers, objected to the witness being ex-amined-on matters of a specific nature sup- ' .porting the witness .Knight's evidence, which .of a genera] nature, whereupon Mr. Findlay waived the matter, witness standine down.' .. ' '..^Mntiff,..recalled, said.that though.he had had posscssioii of the company's books, he had ■ difficulty in ascertaining tlio true position or the'cqnipany, though the statement prepared by .liim was a inore' nearly correct one than : that prepared by Craig'and Hankins. ' This concluded the evidence, after which Mr'. 1 ; Findlay and Mr. Myers addressed tho '-jury,'at;some length;'" - -The jury returned a .v.erdict-for. plaintiff, awarding him £225 . damages. : " Counsel for. tho defendant - company gave notice'to move for a new trial.