A LIBEL ACTION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 8125, 23 March 1887, Page 5

A LIBEL ACTION.

[Fhb Press Association.] , DUNEDIN, March 22. At the Supreme Court, before Mr Justice Williams and a jury, the libel action, Robinson v. Bell and others, was proceeded with. This was a claim for .£50,000 damages, brought by J. W. Robinson, architect, formerly of Dunedin, but now of Wellington, against the proprietor, publisher, and printer of the Everiing Star. The declaration set forth that the defendants printed and published in their newspaper a report under the heading “ A Deserved Rebuke/’ The report was as follows :—“ William Henry White, of Kensington, was charged with assaulting Joseph Robinson on March 3. Mr Monat appeared for the complainant, Mr Dennistonforthe defendant. The evidence showed that the complainant, who is an architect, accosted a sister of the defendant’s on the evening of Peh. 29, and having ascertained her name forced hia company upon her. She was unwilling to carry on a conversation with him, and * walked at a fast pace in order to rid hers.elf of his company. The girl went to the Athscneum, and on her way back was again accosted by the defendant, who asked her to walk along with him. Miss White met a gentleman acquaintance, and complained to him of Robinson’s conduct. Next morning she acquainted her brother of what had happened, and he interviewed the complainant several times for the purpose of obtaining an apology. On the last occasion (Satarday afternoon) he met complainant on the street, and informed him that unless he consented to give a writt-n apology he would thrash him. At complainant's request the defendant went with the former to his office, and after some words had passed, defendant struck him over the back and hands with a cane, the result of which bad been to incapacitate the complainant from following his profession for several 1 days. Mr Denniston was about to address the Court for the defence, when his Worship intithe defendant’s sister in the manner he had, and it was a fortunate thing when young girls who wero subjected to such conduct had fathers and brothers to take their part. An assault had been committed, but he thought a penalty of Is and costs of Court would meet the case. It was alleged that the report of the hearing of the said charge so printed and published was notan accurate, bond fide and impartial report, but was an improper and maliciously distorted account of theproceedings therein mentioned or referred to, and was so printed and published with a view of disparaging and degrading the plaintiff and of exposing him to public ridicule, hatred and contempt; that, in consequence of the publication of such report, the plaintiff was subjected to great annoyance and public ridicule, and was molested and interfered with, and the minds of the public were influenced against the plaintiff. It was further alleged that the defendants published in the said newspaper letters headed “ A Caution to Girls,” signed, “ A Parent; ” “ Girls Beware,” signed, “ Cat-o-nine Tails;” and, “What Shall We Do with Dudes.” That plaintiff is referred to in the said letters in contemptible and malicious terms, and with a view of inducing the public to molest the plaintiff, and to subject him to annoyance, and rough treatment, and of bringing the plaintiff into public hatred and contempt. It is alleged that in consequence of the publication of the said letters the plaintiff was subjected to great annoyance and public ridicule, and was molested and interfered with, and was subjected to malicious prosecution, and had several charges and proceedings preferred against him by sundry persons. It was further alleged that the defendant’s published, concerning some designs exhibited by plaintiff at the Christchurch Exhibition, words which were not a fair and honest criticism of the designs therein referred to, but are malicious and unfair abuse of the plaintiff’s work, and impute to plaintiff want of competent qualification and ability in his said profession, and are intended to be part of the malicious persecution of the plaintiff by the defendants, which had been carried on by the defendant during the greater part of the latter months of the year 1883, for the purpose of disregarding the plaintiff, and of exposing him to public ridicule, hatred and contempt, and of injuring him in his said profession, and in his character. Finally, the declaration alleges, that in consequence of the mental anxiety produced by the publication of the aforesaid libels, the plaintiff’s health was undermined, and he was confined to. bed and unable to attend to his professional business for the space of 21 months, and is only just recovered from his illness. The aforesaid libels have caused the plaintiff great and irreparable injury, and they are malicious and untrue. Wherefore he claims £50,000 as damages. The defence admitted all the publication, but said that the reports were fair and impartial, and denied that the plaintiff was referred to in the letters.

Mr D. M. Stuart opened for the plaintiff, and then called the plaintiff, who gave evidence at great length. He denied that he had first addressed the girl White. He also denied that the Magistrate had made the comments attributed to him. In crossexamination he said he had been, on several occasions, threatened to be horsewhipped, and he had been pelted with stones and brick-bats. He had been " clouted.” He did not remember the occasion of being smothered with floor. Drs Roberta and Davis were examined as to tbe plaintiff being an out-door patient at the Hospital for nervousness, and Mr Cohen, associate editor of the Star, as to the publication of the letters, which he admitted he thought referred to ths plaintiff. Mr Haggitt called for the defence Mr Carew, 8.M., who heard the assault case, and the reporters to prove the accuracy of the report. As to the assault ease, the jury, after three hours’ consideration, returned with a verdict for the defendant, and the Judge entered it acoordingly, with costs and disbursements as per scade. ’rhe costs on the amount claimed would appear to be J 61262 IQs. '