DAMAGES FOR SLANDER

Evening Star, Issue 19325, 11 August 1926, Page 10

DAMAGES FOR SLANDER

A CCCTOR'S CREDIT [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, August 10. Au action for slander and a claim for £2,000 damages was brought by •Tohn Paterson Donald, Acting Chief Medical Officer of the Cook Islands in 1925, against Trevor Lewis, of Tapu, a Thames settler. Mr Treadwell, of Wellington, represented the plaintiff, and Mr O. P, Einlay the defendant. The statement of claim was that, on or about September 28. 1925, defendant falsely and maliciously spoke and published concerning plaintiff the following words: —“A hoy developing Tetanus was callously treated _by Dr Donald, who gave him no injection and made no further effort to relievo him. Dr Donald has been found in an intoxicated condition, and he habitually inclines in bush beer drinking.” These words were published at the offices of tho Secretary of the Cook Islands Department, Wellington, and were heard by the Minister in charge of the Cook .Islands .and Stephen John Smith, a Civil servant.

Plaintiff stated that he was injured m his credit and his reputation in his protessiou and as Acting Chief Medical Officer.

The defence was a denial of the statement, and that if it were made it was privileged; that the statement was made to plaintiff’s superior officers, who had an interest in the efficient discliarge of the duties of their subordinate officers, of whom plaintiff was one. The hearing of the case commenced vestertiay, and was concluded to-day, when tiie jury awarded plaintiff £251) damage sand costs.

Mr Finlay, for the defence, submuted that the case as it stood was perfectly simple. The fact remained that tnero was a considerable body 01 complaint in the island. The petition and a letter boro this out. There wore a number of grown men who signed it, saying they had no confidence in Dr Donald, it was agreed that his work ■mould bo investigated, and so where uad be suffered damage? The.rumors had been killed, and the doctor had received a letter of appreciation. Lewis went to the Islands with his wife, who, ■ ortunateiy, was a doctor. She would cell how tnero was a distinct disinclination on the part of tho natives to go to Dr Donald. It became better when Dr Burton came on the scone. Lewis had never seen Cowan (who was a native chief) before, and be carried considerable sway with the natives. He would say that Cowan had told him various things. Cowan told Lewis certain tilings concerning the administration of the hospital. The petition was written by Cowan and translated by him. It was true that Lewis felt resentful when Dr Donald refused to supply the drugs which were being used by Mrs Lewis, in her care and attention of the natives on the other side of the island. Lewis had no hand in the preparation or circulation of the petition, but he was asked to take it to Wellington. Ho declined unless ho were given a letter to the Minister and a copy of the petition was left with the Resident Commissioner, and that was apparently done. There, was no personal malice against plaintiff. Defendant lived ton miles away from Dr Donald. Defendant, in evidence, traversed the facts as outlined by his counsel. Cowan was a chief, and was not a relation of his or his wife. Witness heard a great many rumors regarding the administration of the hospital. While his wife was on tho island a number ol natives came to her for treatment. That was done with the sanction of Dr Burton. The treatment was gratuitous, He was present when tho petition was written by Cowan. He was responsible for none of the contents. After an interview with the Res'dent Commissioner witness and Dr Donald parted quite good friends. In his interview with Sir Maui Pomare witness said the Minister pestered him with inquiries. Witness was asked what the rumors were, and he told two stories. One was about the boy, and he assured the Minister of the unreliability of tho natives Witness also mentioned Cowan because the Minister had travelled with him. “ Sir Maui was pumping me. I can •see it now," said the witness. Witness received no intimation of an inquiry. He heard of it after it was all over. He was quite prepared to accept the finding of the inquiry. The suggestion that lie was wealthy was quite untrue. To Air Treadwell: I absolutely deny I told Sir Maui Pomare that 1 could prove the charges to tho hilt. Air Treadwell: How did that come in the statement of claim? Witness: Sir Maui may have had his own ideas. Air Treadwell: Then it is nntrue? Witness; f cannot say what Sir Muni Pomare would do. Witness admitted he told Sir Maui that tho boy had died because of the carelessness of Dr Donald. He strenuously denied that he said ho could prove it. Air 'Treadwell: So Sir Alaui and Mr Smith came up from Wellington to commit deliberate prejury? • Witness; I cannot say anything about that. The wife of the defendant gave corroborative.'evidence. Air Finlay submitted that the case divided itself into two parks. Did Lewis make these charges? He put that during tlie discussion with Sir Maui Pomare the latter pumped Lewis, and he told the A 1 inis ter of the minors current. He did not make any charges. If he said he could vouch for tho truth of the statements, why did they not get him before tho Commission. Air Treadwell dealt at length with the facts of the case. He stressed the point that “slander sticks in the mind of the public." The Government had endeavored to clear itself by an inquiry, but, oven though the charges were ruled to be unfounded, the impression would still linger. Sir Maui Pomare and Air Smith had given evidence as private citizens. Who could say what incalculable harm had be.en done plaintiff? Counsel .submitted he was entitled to compensation on account of the mental agony he had suffered. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for £250 by a majority of 9 to 3. Plaintiff was awarded costs.