A LIBEL ACTION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12531, 19 June 1901, Page 5

A LIBEL ACTION.

[Per , Press Association.] DUNEDIN, June IS. The 'libel action, Dr Ooughtrey against the “ Evening Star ” Company, occupied l the Supreme Court to-day. The alleged libel was contained in an article published in April last, reflecting upon the conduct of plaintiff at a meeting of the City and Suburban Tramway Company, in which he was described as a caviller, with having attended the meeting with the set purpose of having a fling at the directors, and making mischief by throwing upon the director# the" odium of treating the tramway employees unjustly. Mr W. A. Sim appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr F. R. Chapman for the defence. Evidence was , given indicating that Dr Coughtrey’s question about the employees was put to enable allegations about the employees to be denied, and he had informed the manager of his intention 1 to put it. The case resolved itself into ■two questions: —(I)’the criticism of the plaintiff in the article; (2) as to whether the statements contained in the article, statements which were proved not to be in accordance with fact, ■ and from which ■ cer- ■ tain inferences were drawn, were or were not defamatory and libellous. The jury,' after a brief retirement, returned with a verdict that the statements in the article’were fair criticism, written without malice. Mr ijsim pointed out that this only answered, one branch of the case, but not as to statements which were not in the nature of criticism. His Honor again directed the jury, remarking that the evidence hardly justified the conclusion that it came within the doctrine of criticism.- It was for the jury to say whether it was libellous! The foreman said that the jury had unanimously conclin|ed that it was not libellous. A verdict was given for ■defftidante with costs.