A LIBEL ACTION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXIV, Issue 13936, 19 December 1905, Page 9

A LIBEL ACTION.

A CANDIDATE’S CL ADI EOS DAMAGES. .[Pee Press Association.] AUCKLAND, December 18. Mr Justice Edwards, End a jury of twelve were occupied in the Supremo Court to-day with the trial of a libel action brought by Theophilus Wake, an Independent candidate at tho recent elections for the Bay of Islands’ seat, and part proprietor of tho “ Alangomii County Times,” published at Mangonui, against Francis Mackenzie, proprietor of tho “ Northern Luminary,” a newspaper published at Kakawa. Plaintiff claimed £IOOO. Mr Blair was for tho plaintiff, and Mr J. C. Martin for tho defendant.

Tho libel was alleged to exist in the publication in tho “Luminary” of July 8 last of words relating to tho plaintiff, which it was alleged were intended to mean that plaintiff had been guilty of a crime, and fled from justice, that ho had deserted his wife, and been guilty of shameful, dishonourable, and dishonest conduct, and was unfit, (socially and morally, .to sit in Parliament. Tho defence was a denial of false and malicious publication of matter having reference to plaintiff, or of anything intended to mean that plaintiff had been guilty of fleeing from justice or of wife desertion, or shameful, , dishonourable conduct, or of social or ; moral unfitness to sit in Parliament. It was also denied that the publication prejudiced the plaintiff’s electoral prospects, or brought him into public scandal, odium, and contempt. If, how- ! ever, it were found that defendant did print and publish words bearing the meaning alleged, then, in mitigation of damages, it was alleged that “ Hansard ” reported a speech of Mr B. M’Kcnzie (member for Motueka), on September 15, 1898, containing allegations affecting the plaintiff, which defendant believed to be true, _ and to justify the publication complained of. The defence further alleged that after leaving the police force plaintiff became -a clerk in the Government Life Assurance Office at Timaru, and a prominent temperance worker, and that while there he seduced a young girl, that he left the colony, and on his return, loft his wife and resided at Kawhia and Raorao with a Native woman, and that if plaintiff’s reputation and credit had suffered damage by-anything defendant had published, it would be fully recompensed by the sum of 20s. The defendant accordingly brought the sum of 20s into Court. Air Martin said his client admitted publication of the words complained of. Theophilus Wake gave evidence that the words complained of were regarded ,in the district as applying to him, and seriously affected his prospect of election as member of Parliament for the district. Witness said it was untrue that he was dismissed from the police force-, but, on the contrary, he voluntarily resigned, and was given a “very good ” discharge paper. It was untrue that ho cohabited at Kawhia with a Native woman. ' ,

Air Martin questioned the, witness as follows:—When in Timaru you took an active part in temperance matters, I think? __ ' Witness: Yes. Did you make the acquaintance of a certain young lady there?

Witness: Yes. You know that you were accused of having seduced her? Witness: Yes. I was Hocused of it, and that was the first intimation I had of it. 1, my wife and a friend and myself wont down to meet the accusation. Who were present'ahTho interview? Witness; The girl’s mother, myself and my wife, the Eev Mr Beecroft and Mr T. E. Taylor. Did you satisfy them? Witness: I went there to satisfy myself’and Mr Taylor. Did you satisfy the people present? Witness: I did not concern myself to satisfy anyone at Timarn. I was more concerned with satisfying the people at Christchurch. _ Yon see there was an election coming off at Christchurch, .and Mr T. E. Taylor and myself were to be two independent candidates. ' There were then three seats for Christchurch, and I wanted to satisfy the party there. If they were not satisfied I would not have contested the seat. Did you succeed in satisfying them? "Witness: I : never asked them. _ I never had an opportunity. My belief is that their impression was against me. I can’t prove it. Was it not in consequence of not .having satisfied the two ministers and Mr Taylor that you did not continue to work with the temperance party? Witness: No. You are quite wrong about that. There were certain people in Christ church whom, I was directly interested in. Was it not in. consequence of' this matter that you left the .colony and went to Tasmania? Witness;' No.

Defendant gave evidence, saying that prior to publication of the alleged libellous matter ho did not know plaint tiff, and therefore could not have published the articles maliciously. His reason for •.publishing them was that ho thought that in the interests of the. electors they should know who the man was. ■

Evidence was given by. the Revs W. Gnlies and J. Boecroft with reference to the Timaru incident, and by a number of Maoris in regard to_ the plaintiff’s relations with a Alaori girl. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for £1 damages, arid the question of costs was reserved.