SLANDER ALLEGED

Hawera Star, Volume L, 19 February 1931, Page 4

SLANDER ALLEGED

PROMINENT FARMER SUED SHAREMILKER’S ACTION CLAIM FOR £lO DAMAGES. Alleging that defendant had assaulted and slandered her while she was in his office, Victoria Street, Hawera, on December 18, Ida Fanny Taylor, a married woman, proceeded against James Randall Corrigan in the Hayvera Magistrate’s Court this morning, claiming £lO damages. Defendant was alleged to have said to plaintiff: “You and your husband are robbers.’’ The plaintiff and her husband, having been employed by defendant as sharemilkers, alleged that defendant meant by the words that plaintiff had stolen his cattle or otherwise had committed a criminal offence punishable corporally. Mr. L. A. Taylor appeared for plaintiff and Mr. D. G. Smart for defendant. ... , Plaintiff, in evidence, said that she and her husband had been sharemilking for defendant for three years up to"last season. During the period of their employment yvith defendant her husband had lost an eye, but whether her husband Was insured or not she did not know. However, ho had received £250 compensation, Mr. Corrigan stating that £l5O of that sum had come out of his oyvn pocket. On Decmeber 17 she had called at defendant’s office and asked Mr. Robinson, secretary to defendant, if she yvas not entitled to portion of a dairy company bonus. He had referred her to Mr. Corrigan. The next day she had again called at the office and met Mr. Corrigan. He looked angr3 f , as lie always did to her, and she informed him that she had called for her share of the factory bonus. His answer had been: “How do you know there is a bonus?” Witness had replied that other sharemilkers had told her. Mr. Corrigan bad also referred to a dispute over some pigs and calves, and when yvitness had said that she was still owed for her share he had said she was a —— liar. He had been angry the whole time and had refused to pay her the bonus money unless a receipt in full settlement was signed. Also, he had said that yvitness and her husband had not properly looked after his herd Witness had replied that it had been, only since her husband had lost his eye that Mr. Corrigan had turned them down. He had then said that yvitness and her husband were robbers and that if he had done as much robbing as she and her husband he yvould be ashamed to meet people. Witness had then broken down. He had also added that he did not want liars yvorking for him. Witness had tried to leave the office, but defendant had forced her back again, although he did not then lay his hands on her. He offered to apologise. She had made another endeavour to leay'e the place, but defendant had put his hand on her shoulder and pushed her back into the office, telling her to sign the receipt. Witness had then signed a receipt for milk monies. Defendant had used bad language, and Mr. Robinson, in an attempt to govern him, had shut the office door in his face. Later, Mr. Robinson had asked her not to make trouble over the incident, remarking that lie had that sort of thing to put up with every day. Replying to Mr. Smart, witness said that heir daughter yvas not in the office at the time of the alleged assault and slander, but was yvithin hearing. She denied that she had accused defendant of swindling her and her husband out of £250 over the loss. of her husbaud’s e.ye. It yvas also denied she had told defendant he had made slaves of them. She had not used high words at the interview, but had been quite calm and collected. Witness did not think that defendant had meant that she and her husband had stolen cattle or anything of that nature when he had called them robbers. It was hard to understand what he implied. Questioned about the pushing incident, the witness left the box and demonstrated what she claimed had happened. She said that she was not hurt.

I Constant interjections by Mr. Taylor vire baited by the magistrate, who requested him to remain quiet. Continuing, witness, said that defendant had pushed her into a chair and that Mr. Robinson had kept advising her to sign the receipt. She had refused to sign the receipt until it was altered, and Mr. Corrigan had shouted: “Alter the thing then.” Gladys Taylor, daughter of plaintiff, said that she stood by the open door of the office and could hear Mr. Corrigan’s voice raised in anger and could distinctly hear him say to her mother: “You’re a - liar,” and that they were robbers. She had then gone to town to collect some parcels. On her return the door was still wide open. Mr. Corrigan was standing in the corridor with his back to the door and it looked as though lie was stopping her mother from leaving. "Witness had then left to go in search of her brother. She had met her mother down town about a quarter of an hour later and there were signs that she had been crying. (Continued on page 9.)