ALLEGED LIBEL

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 25 June 1927, Page 9

ALLEGED LIBEL

THE TIMPANY CASE.

ACTION AGAINST “EXPORTER.”

FURTHER EVIDENCE GIVEN

BY TELEGRAPH—SPECIAL TO THE STAR WELLINGTON, Juno 24.

The case in which Thomas JMjarr Timpany proceeded against the “New Zealand Dairy Produce Exporter,” for £2OOO for alleged libel was continued this afternoon.

When, the Court resumed, Mr Blair resumed his cross-examination of Mr Timpany. Tim plaintiff admitted that the reports ol his meetings in tlie Invercargill papers were fair, although they w ere not complete. He had told those present at his meeting on September 9, 1926, that Mr Good fellow A butter was outside of control. Dealing with, the Prime Minister’® telegram, Mr Blair asked witness who had read the telegram. Witness replied that the secretary of the board read it.

Did he say where it came from? — Mr Hawken.

Did vou consider you lia da night to make the cablegram public?—lf i,t was in the interests of my electors to do ®:o.

Why .should you Jbroadjcasti these things?—l cannot understand your attitude. Any working dairy farmer over 31 for the past 12 months would fully understand it.

Did you consider you had a right luncheon adjournment after the cablegram was. read? "Where did you go during the luncheon adjournment?—l was at my hotel.

Did you go to J. B. McEwen? —No. Did you see Colonel Hall? —No. When tlie reporter came to see you in the evening did you, perhaps unconsciously, give the reporter the contents of the telegram?—No. Were you not ,in fact, the source of the. information given to “The Times”? —No. the editor of that paper assured me that their report was not based on anything I gave them. Replying, to further questions, Mir Timpauv said that he did not take .Instructions. from £he secretary of the board.

Did not the board later censure you, by a unanimous vote, for disclosing confidential matters?—Yes. I was absent from the meeting. Why ? —My correspondence went astray, and I wa.s innocent of the fact that there was a meeting. The '“Exporter” is the only paper that has withdrawn the word “deliberate.” is it not? —Yes But you are claiming from the “Exporter.” and from no other paper.

The statement li.n the “Exporter” was made under different circumstance® altogether. Opening the case for the defence, Mr A. W. Blair said that it would be clear that Mr Timpany had misled the electors of his ward, especially in regard to Mr Goodfellow’s interest. Mr Timpanv had told the electors that he had received his information first-hand. [lts submission established that his facts were correct. Then it could not be said that that comment was anything but fair. There wa« not the slightest doubt that Mr Goodfellow’s butter was subject to control and the electors ol" Southland should have had that fac-t made available to them. In regard to the Prime Minister’® cablegram, Mr Blair said that the cablegram was forwarded bv the Prime Minister to somebody in his department, handed to the Minister of Agriculture, and then forwarded to the Control Board. Mr Blair said he hoped to establish that the cablegram was marked “confidential.’’ John Robert Thacker, a member of the Dairv Produce Control Boaird since its inception, and at times; actingchairman of the Board, said that he was in the chair at the meeting at which the Prime Minister’,s message was read. Mr Brash said that he had -i confidential message from the Prime Minister. The message was read to the meeting.- which was then adjourned for lunch. It was the custom of the board not to disclose confidential mattorsi without the authority of the board.

Thomas. Buddie Brash, secretary of the Dairv Control Board, said that the envelope containing the cablegram of the Prime Minister was marked urgent and confidential.

John Fisher, an accountant at Otnutau, and formerly a member of the hoard, said that lie had opposed Air Tim pane at the last election. He admitted having made a statement that Mi- Tinmanv had deliheiraTtely misled the people of Southland. . .. In answer to Sir John Findlay, t witness deprecated the .suggestion that there was any ill-feeling so far as he ami Air Timpany were concerned. Oswald James. Hawken, Minister of Agriculture, stated that the Prime Minister’s cablegram had through the Acting-Prime Minaister: He instructed his secretary to send the cable to the hoard for its consideration. Witness said he had never given auv authority for the publication of the message. To Sir John Findlay witness said that the com- lie received was not marked ■'‘confidential.” The Court adjourned until 10 o clock this morning.