BLACKLISTED

Grey River Argus, 27 June 1925, Page 5

BLACKLISTED

COERCING DEBTORS Gisborne Revelations (Per Press Association.) GISBORNE, June 26. An interesting civil claim came before Mr E. C. Lewy. S.M., to-day, when Milliuent Clarke, a married wo. maxi, proceeded against the Associated Creditors League, of Auckland, claiming .£5O damages for alleged unfair, blackmailing. The statement of claim alleged that the defendants falsely ami maliciously published the name of plaintiff in a publication circulated amongst various business firms and persons and to various other persons i’ii Gisborne and elsewhere, a statement that plaintiff was indebted to a person unnamed the sum of £l3 for dentures. Plaintiff was not in fact indebted to anyone for dentures, and by reason of the statement, plaintiff had suffered damage, and her credit had been injured. The plaintiff had also suffered in health and mind and estate. The plaintiff therefore claimed £5O. Mr L. T. Barnard appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr J • R- Kirk for th? defendants. For plaintiff Mr Barnard said plabntiiT was suffering from pyorrhea ami her teeth were extracted by Harold (’atfo dentist and as a result of something wliii-li followed the extraearion, an alleged debt was incurred. Plain, tiff had no idea of dentures in mind when she went to the dentists. After the extraction, and while plaintiff was eoinwig out of the anaesthetic whatever it was, Gatto put a document before her and asked her to sign, which she did. She was so bad that she collapsed at the foot of the stairs. Next day Gatto showed her a copy of what she had signed. Plaintiff did not get her dentures made by Gatto, nor did she go to him again, except to have her mouth washed out. Months later, Catto had written to her regarding the dentures. and after that he started 10 send accounts. Plaintiff's husband called on Gatto, and Gatto had told him he had extracted the teeth cheaply, as he expected to get the dentures. Her husband said he would pay any extra amount asked for the extractions, but Gatto refused this. Gatto sent a law. ver’s letter to her, which was followed bv a series of bombardments on the part of tlie Associated Creditors’ League.

Counsel contended that it was a novel method of inakimg debtors pay. calculated to make debtors do what the creditors desired them to do in a most extraordinary manner. The system was that creditors were supplied with foulletters. The i rst notice sent out was as follows: — “As you are aware, your account with us has now been owing for a considerable time. We hoped this fact combined with the leniency we have shown vou in the past, would have brought about a settlement, without putting us to further trouble. Surely you must recognise how impossible it is for us to conduct business on such lines. We are now compelled to hand the account to the Associated Creditors’ League for a compulsory settlement. We would prefer riot’ to take such drastic measures, hut will have no alternative unless we receive an immediate response to this letter.'’ The second read;— “Your failure to acknowledge our notice now compel us to take the necessary action for the collection of the amount due, without fuijher delay. We are under an agreement with the Associated Creditors’ Lea. gue to hand in a full report of our outstanding accounts, after a certain lapse of time. Consequently your name must now be forwarded to them. This means that your account will be published by them, with no desire to persecute you. but simple as a necessary measure at the present time, for the protection of all trades. ” On. 4 lie reverse side of the letter, under the heading “Why Judgments and Accounts are Offered For bale, there was the statement: — “The Associated Creditors’ League set rut on a campaign to collect al! old outstanding accounts for their members, this being done not only for their protection, but also for the protection of hose people who either pay their bills promptly, or, if faced with misfortune, are honest enough to explain the circumstances, and make nrra'iigcments. Such people must be made to suffer for the neglect or dishonestv of those who do - therwise. You are faced with thi necessity of doing something at once. I’ayment must be made to your cred, itors. ’ ’

The third letter read: “We have been instructed by tno Associated Creditors’ League to sign and forward final notice before they proceed to publish this account in your district, or take auy action which they deem necessary for the recovery of the amount in settlement of your indebtedness. You have an opportunity for one week only to save yourself cost and in’, pleasantness by coming to. an understanding with us on receipt of the final notice."’ After that, said Mr Burnaml, notice was sent to the League to collect the debt While these notices were going on. plaintiff saw Gatto, and the notiers ceased for a time, but another series came from the local Association. She saw the secretary and explained she did not owe money, but then the account was placed in the hands or their solicitors. A peculiar teature of the blacklist was that it was published not onlv to creditors, but also to debtors which meant that all who owed debts knew of debts owed by plain. 11 j.j. E. Hill, land agent, said he received a copy of the list. Plaintiff gave evidence on the lines outlined by counsel. Rov Crawford, dentist, said he was a member of the defendant League. He was to give the first three letters, and the fourth was to be torwarded to the Auckland office. The object oi publication of names was not to give credit to those whose names were published. . - , In replv to Mr Kirk, witness said ue was the inan who made the dentures. For the defence, Mr Kirk said the contest was between plaintiff and Gatto He did not think anything had been brought out against the League, which had advice to the effect t ha * ’*'■ system was within the law. Catto would say the agreement was s ’g l,c '} prior to the extraction Al! the list showed was that plaintiff owed a debt to Catto, and the League offered the debt for -sale. Eight lists were sent to Catto, and seven were still in his possession. He contended it was not

. t,. make a statement ini. defamatory to raak i debt s. ’’cX'gaVeSee on the lines of Counsel’s address. iudgm ent, the In. CO "^, C the list was Magistrate s-ii intentions, inpubhshed with .. creditors, c ’ ,ul '' n Veral straightout threatening iiftPr the names had to be le,te ra-so a< let P eoll '° W blu-kliyted. , , t he debtors were read the list know rae de to be warned )l; at claim for 9 damages was not a*nd the . iudgment for £5O "'a" woild not unduly compensate . and costs v Judgm ent was entered - the plaintiffaccordingly-