ALLEGED LIBEL

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 June 1912, Page 6

ALLEGED LIBEL

ARCHBISHOP CLARKE v. NORTON

[PER PRESS ASSOCIATION —COPYRIGHT.]

MELBOURNE, June 19.

Counsel for Arcnbiahop Clarke, on concluding his address, churned that the defendant deliberately, falsely, and maliciously put on record a statement that plaintiff was exercising a veto in regard to Canon Nash, and did so without honestly investigating the charges, and acted with a preconceived determination to deprive Canon Nash of his position.: The Archbishop made a long statement in the box, reviewing the whole facts and showing that he made exhaustive in, quiries into the allegations against Canon Nash, whom he consulted and advised, Canon Nash agreeing to his suggestion to submit the case to the Cathedral Chapter. (A cablegram on June 17th stated that the action of Archbishop Clarke against John Norton, editor of the newspaper Truth, claiming £SOOO damages, was commenced. The alleged libel was contained in an article dealing with the case of Canon Nash, wherein the Archbishop was stignatised as a nightman, a pestilent parasite, an inquisitor and an Anglican anarchist. Ho was challenged to meet the writer in a court of law.)