SUPREME COURT. CIVIL SITTINGS. Yesterday. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.)

Evening Post, Volume XXII, Issue 14, 16 July 1881, Page 2

SUPREME COURT. CIVIL SITTINGS. Yesterday. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.)

Griffiths v. Johnston. This case was concluded yesterday afternoon. Subjoined are the issues and their authority, as brought in by the special jury, after one hour's deliberation: — 1. Did the defendant falsely and maliciously publish of and concerning the plaintiff the words set forth in the seventh paragraph of the plaintiff's declaration? — Yes. 2. Were the said words or part of them intendod to mean that the plaintiff had caused the fire by which the Government Buildings at Blenheim had been destroyed, and that the reward of .£SOO, which was offered for the conviction of the person causing the said fire, could be obtained by the conviction of the plaintiff ?—? — Tes. 3. Were tho said words or part of them intended to mean and did they mean that the plaintiff had been guilty of stealing from the Bank of New Zealand the sum of .£3,700, stolen from the said bank at tho branch office at Pioton, on or about the Ist September, 186i?— Yes. 4 Were the said words or part of them intanded to mean and did they mean that sufficient evidence to convict the plaintiff of causing the said fire at the Government Buildings at Blenheim, and of the stealing the said sum of money from the Bank of New Zealand, was known to exist and was obtainable? — Not necessarily. 5. What damages (if any) is the plaintiff entitled to recover from the defendant P-J6250. Mr. Conolly asked his Honor to certify for costs, and that this was a proper case to be tried by a special jury. His Honor at once agreed to do so. The Courb then adjourned.