THE FARR CASE

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 14, 17 January 1925, Page 7

THE FARR CASE

I COSTS AGAINST DR. THOMPSON I ■ '".'•■ — '■ ' ■ :'■ / I -8.-M.A. SEEKS PETITION IN BANKRUPTCY, i (UNITKD PRKSS ASSOCIATION.—COPMISHT.) )' (Received 17th January, 9 a.m.) . SYDNEY, This Day.. The New South Wales branch of the British Medical Association has lodged a petition in bankruptcy for f the compulsory sequestration of the.estate of Dr. George Stanley. Thompson to meet the amount of the judgment obtained against Dr. Thompson, with interest therecm, totalling £2268; also £322 for costs in connection with the further judgment ob-tained-in England on the result of Dr; Thompson's appeal to the Privy Council against the first judgment.. ' ■ The petition is the outcome- of the controversy between the British Medical Association and Dr. Thompson over the case of Mrs. Maude Farr, of New Zealand.

Dr.- .Thompson some three years ago espoused the cause of Mrs. Farr, wife of Professor Parr, of Christchurch, who he ■" declared, was confined in a mental hospital at Gladesville, New South Wales, when there was no need for such seclusion. He made serious allegations against Mrs. Farr's husband and others. As a result of Dr. Thompson's charges the Lunacy Court met in, Sydney and reviewed the case, deciding 1 that there was no justification for the charges, and that Mrs. Farr should riot be allowed to immediately leave Gladesville Asylum. The Court was of. the opinion that she should be_ removed to a place more in keeping with her station in life. The case then resulted in a quarrel between the British Medical Association . and Dr.: Thompson, the latter claiming £5000 for defamation and for his expulsion front on™a?s? oiation-- The jury awarded hint i.^ooo damages, but a stay of proceedings was granted. : The association appealed to the Full Court and rthe decision was reversed. Dr. Thompson then sued the •_™5 d, lea!-Journal: of, Australia 1' for &5000, the Court awarding £1000 damages, which decision was not ■ appealed against^ The next move was to the envy Council, v Dr. Thompson appealing against the Full Court decision, but'here again he was not successful, the case going against him. -