LITIGANT’S ALLEGATION

Greymouth Evening Star, 29 August 1934, Page 3

LITIGANT’S ALLEGATION

DEAD JUDGE’S SANITY. LONDON, July 1. A suggestion that the late Mr Justice McCardie was not of sound mind when he tried an action at the Birmingham Assizes was made by the defendant in a libel action at the Assizes before Mr Justice du Pareq in the same city yesterday. The action was one in which a firm of Birmingham solicitors, Messrs Price, Atkins and Price, were the plaintiffs, and the defendant was Jeffrey Williams. a coal merchant ■ and sports ground contractor, of Edgbaston, -who counter-claimed for £lO,OOO damages. Mr Justice du Parcq said he was not satisfied that there was cause of action shown in the counter claim. Williams said he going to say something unusual —the cause of all the trouble was a judgment of the late Mr Justice McCardie which he (Williams) submitted was made when his lordship was of unsound mind. The Judge: Stop! What is that to do with this case? Williams: It has been the cause of all the trouble. The Judge: You are not so foolish as you are hoping to make yourself out to be. 1. don’t want to hear any more of that. Williams: I am bound to. because 'I have been ruined through it. It was i through the perjured evidence of Alfred Williams, a solicitor, that the 'judgment was obtained. I The Judge: You will have to conduct the case in accordance with my ruling, or not at all. Williams: Even a judge of the High Court is subject to the unusual weaknesses. The Judge: It cannot make any difference in this case. Let me hear no more about it. Whether the learned judge was right or wrong, you cannot go into it. Learned judges make mistakes. Among the witnesses called by the defendant on subpoena was the Lord Mayor of Birmingham. He stated that he received a letter from the defendant. It was of such a nature that he immediately handed it over to the Town Clerk. “I receive many letters from people who are unwell mentally, and I thought this - was one of them,” he added. The judge stopped a number of questions Williams attempted to put to the Lord Mayor, and said he was abusing the leniency showed him in a most outrageous manner. He also stopped questions to another witness, a solicitor, saying: “I won’t, let you use Ihis court for the purpose of your malice.” Defendant was frequently .stopped by his lordship for infringing the Rules of Procedure. At one point the judge asked him: — “How many judges do yon say have been dishonest?” “They may not have been dishonest, but mistaken,” defendant replied. Messrs Price. Atkins, and Price, were awarded £5OO damages. An injunction restraining defendant from, publishing further libels was granted.