GRIERSON THACKER LIBEL ACTION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 21, 19 October 1918, Page 13

GRIERSON THACKER LIBEL ACTION

•:.■ INTERROGATORIES'-'tO BEY- ■■ :...' , " ,ANsWERiso; 7"; ■."'■. I Sitting in Chambers in the Supreme Court yesterday His Honour !rtr. Justice-Chapman" heard argument-on'-.'certain "interrogatories •' which' the plaintiff Bouglifi to;mak'e'in the,.:libel , action brought -by -Lieutenant A. ...H..(irierson against Dr. H. T; J. Thacker, M.P.,' Chnstchurch. Mr. T;\ Neave; appeared for-.the. plaintiff and Sir.John Findlay, ICC;, for the defendant. ■ 'The interrogatories were as follow:—' • (1) Did-you on or about February. 27; 1918,' in'the course of a speech' made "by you at the Town. HaH.i Wellington, uso the following, words ..of. and'concerning'the plaintiff-, to wit:. "A;few" of -us; Madaiiie , Boeufve and .others,, were .suspicious .'.of (iriorson,and had ■ his- boxes . searched. '. Wi' found. evidence that he was ail arrant German spj , . Sir James , Allen told us that he was an elegant English gentleman, of 400 years' standing, b.ut.be had .-scarcely -got to the ■ front •when. h,e went over. ; to the'.ehemy,".OT.w'6fdß to that effect? ■ :;.;■,.;"■■ ; : -v; ~;■:.■:. •(2.) 'Did ypii'iti 'such speech luse! ofsuclr.words, and,-if so, which of the ; said Tcords didyou'useP' . : : .; : ■'(3,)H you'-did "not. use- the- exact words'quoted above, but-.;UBed-words of.', similar import; 'state. sis nearly' 'as ■ yoii.can , reniember. the, exacts words .you. did itse. ■'.'?■ .■:..> ; •;.,.-.■■■. ■-. ;•. . .(,4.) Di3.you .on .the said : occasion use. any mnd- what words cbhcermng plaiiihtl'l ■.-;: : ' :.-,"■,, •-. .."■■ ?;■■:; ■?■;: "^J .(5;) AVere the .said 'wprdS-or'.words, of similar import orvany .of Vth'em. spoken., in-the presence of .persons known : to.--yoii'i and,' if so,- what perßoiis?■' : '■ ." '■• : -Sir. John Eindlay,,•maintained 'that j ■ tho'plaintiff got.an answer to .the first..andjs'econd questions it would be quite' ; BufEcieiit.. ' The.third .and'fourth.ques-' . tions were entirely of--the nature of a. "fishing expedition.". The fifth tiori was an attempt' to' diwover; wit-:' nesses for.' .the plaintiff..;..': ■'','. ,'.'..: : ...;. ' : His Horiour'-- did not.call on" Mr. 1 Neave torepiy. . His. Honour said that, the; alleged Words' were Uttered ab.put a.man'.'whf) was absent .from the country, at the. time they. .were, alleged : to-have'been .uttered, -and' he. had- to resort 'to' this 'means of 'obtaining preliminary information, and: if it turned put to be the •"'•fact that theso words ' were used, it was • admitted that it . would put plaintiff to .a'- , great deal of cost and 'trouble in' proving! his case.. That; was the maiii. object or the interrogatories. The order would be made,' the answers.. to be given within ton days. ■

"Why is it," ■ asked the" inquisitive husband, "that you"' never'ask anyone; if your hat is on straight, as,l so often hear other women do?- , "Well, if vou must:knovr;" replied his wife, : "it is because I love you so much." !"But [ fail to see whnt your love for me has to do'with it." "Why, just think howit wou'ld "disgrace you if I wore to call anyone's attention to the,only hat I have ..had in : three .years.!?-. And..tnat',s why,-on the .very next'occasion she went-put, 'she appeared:-,iri,-j.the ,; latest creation of/the milliner's-art. ' -f'.'-x