SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVI, Issue 14386, 31 May 1907, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

I Thursday, May 30. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Cliapi man.) j A NEWSPAPER AFFAIR, Wilfrid B. Ingram claimed from George Renner £250 damages, and sued also ior an injunction. Mr Wtstc-n appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Dougall for the defendant. Mr Weston briefly stated the case. Plaintiff, he said, was the proprietor of the " Kaikoura Star," which ho had purchased somo time ago from the defendant. The negotiations were mainly carried on with defendant, though in a loose, unbusinesslike way. It was a part of the contract that dotendaiu. should not re-engage in journalism m Kaikoura in opposition to rjlaintiff as long as the latter owned the "Star. The paper was published' by defendant s roii Cyril, but it was contended that the paper was really defendant s. i'he defendant went away U- Pahiatua, where ho was) starting a fresh paper. Some time afterwards Reamer returned with. po.mo of his family, and started another paper, the "Kaikoura Suu, : ' in opposition to plaintifi. Defendant's «m was tho registered publisher of tho paper, but it was heid that it belonged to defendant, Defendant; had contributed copy and articles to tho new paper. It was contended either that tho new paper belonged to defendant, in. which case defendant ha-J. broken the agreement, or if the paper war, not his, "he had at least-engaged indirectly in journalism In either caso the'agreement was broken. _ I Wilfrid Beach Ingram, the plaintiff, gave very lengthy evidence concerning the making ot tho bargain when he purchased the business No formal agreement regarding tho freedom from opposition, was made at tho time of the sale, but a verbal promise, repeated in letters, was given Lveral times, and shortly before _tl 10 new paper, tho -'Sun.' was waited, defendant sent him an nees put in all tho letters written .to mf by defendant, but it was explained that all the letter from «l«ntiff to defendant had beeti a«*«*|d. the bu-sinees was under olrei ior £6OO, but a reductaon was maae to £3OO cash, and £loo in apmoved bilk. Defendant and witness concluded the bargain themselves in March 1905. The deposit for the sale, £25, was paid to the younger Renner, the father being absent. Defendant was given a send-off, arid was presented with a purse of sovereigns. On that occasion ho urged the public to ' bticK to the 'Star'," but although he had promised to introduce witness to ; tho gathering, made no reference at all to tho new proprietor. Subsequently, when witness had removed from the "Star'' office and Renner cams back and started tho "Sun" there, the eld sign of tho " Star" was left- outside the door, so that Renner'e own words might have been to his advantage. In July 1906, Renner having returned, he said a section of the community had asked him to start another paper. He tried first to buy back the "'Star" for £6OO, but witness would not sell. On November 22 the new paper, published in tho name of A. W. O. Renner, waa published. Witness produced a- file of this, and said that defendant frequently wToto copy for it. The first leading article was patently in defendant's etyle, and expressed fixed conviction:; based on a quarter of a century's e:cperience. Tho nominal owner- and editor was only twenty-six years old. Defendant had reported meetings and other fixtures for tho "'Sun," to plaintiff's knowledge. As a result- of tho institution, of the "Sun" he had lost a great deal of advertising, and was compelled to tender for the County Council advertising at 3d per inch where he used to receive 3s, and put down his total loss, including jobbing, subscriptions and advertising, at about £260. Ho detailed *,pV?cimens of tiJci work ho had lost.

Cross-examined by Mr Bengali, witness produced paragraphs and artieLis which he alleged wore the work of defendant, and published in the "'Sun. " Henry Smith, accountant for Strange ' and Co., produced an account for seeds supplied by them to George Renner, and settled by contra, by advertisements in the "Star" and "Sun," extending into the period prior to the purchase of the "Star" by plaintiff. Mr Dougall admitted the settlement of the private account by the office account. Albert H. Laugesen, eawmiller, Kaikoura, stated that some time ago ho was approached by defendant with a request to buy a paper. William Arthur D'Oridant, manager of the Kaikoura Refrigerating Company, said that defendant came'to him for particular for an article on the new. work, for his eon's paper. This subsequently appeared, after defendant had read over a proof of the .account to witness. Frank Pender gave evidence regarding defendant's bank - account, and plaintiff's case ckwed. Mr Dougall addressed the Court, Elating that the account given of the negotiations by his client differed considerably from that of tho plaintiff. It was held that tho "Star" had been the property of Francis Renner sine© 1900, when it had been sold to him by his father, and that the bargain therefore was between the plaintiff and F. Rentier.

Cyril Francis Renner gave evidence, stating how and when he had acquired the newspaper, and that he had eold it in ordor to get a wider experience. Pie was now a compositor on the staff of " Progress." His father controlled the bank account and had all the negotiations in connection with the sale of the paper, because ho had a better acquaintance with those likely to be interested. Witness trusted him absolutely. Witness was cross-examined at considerable length as to the method of book-keeping used, and admitted that the facilities were not such as would enable a. balance to be struck so as to show where he stood in financial relationship to his father. The latter, when he sold the paper to him, was given as part of the consideration a three years' engagement a» editor at £3 per week, and the rest of tho receipts are divided between the three brothers. . ' George Rennet- was ako called, and described tho transactions that led to the sale of the paper to plaintiff. He {•aid that there was never any mention of a contract that he should not reengage in journalism in Kaikoura, until he had been away some time, and the plaintiff wiote to him about it. Witness denied absolutely having written some of the articles that it was alleged lie had contributed to tho new Kaikoura paper, the "Sun," but admitted certain others for which he had received no payment. Witness's crcss-ex-amiation was not concluded at the end of tho day, and tho case was adjourned till 11.30 a.m. to-day. Tliiri auorning at 10.30 his Honor will hit to sentence a prisoner, and at 11 o'clock there will be a- chamber sitting. The- following is the business:—Applications lor probate—Regarding James Malcolm*on, deceased (Mr Johnston); regarding Richard Collier (Mr Beswick); regarding William Smithson (Mr Smithson) ; regarding Jessie B. Henderson (Mr Weston); regarding Lancelot Walker (Mr Izard). Applications for letters of administration—Regarding Edwin M'Laohlan (Mr Brown); regarding Julius Gall (M.r Wilding). Application regarding Martin Evans, de-

ceased (Mr Slater). Married Persons Summary Separation Act, regarding Green v. Green, motion, to rescind, order and for leave to sell (Mr Malley). Testator's Family Maintenance Act, Gaisford v. Dalo, originating summons of May 23 (Mr Beswick). Land Transfer Act, regarding caveat 1891, summons to extend caveat (Mr Hall); Watson v. Watsoiij motion for directions regarding originating summons (Mr Izard); Rowe v. Lewis, motion for directions (Mr Izard). AN EXTRAORDINARY" CASE. [Per Press Association-.] WANGANUI, May 30. At the Supremo Court yesterday, a young man named M'Lean was found not guilty on a charge of forging; a cheque. "The Judge, said this was tho meet extraordinary case that had com© under his personal notice. Acetified and two companions, named Walo and Foster, went to an hotel, and a cheque was tendered in payment for drink. The hotelkeeper could not swear which of tho three tendered the cheque. Foster said that he saw a cheque pass over the counter, but could not say who passed it. Wale and the accused each swore that they did not eee any cheque tendered. The Judge said that the jury had no option but to find a verdict of not guilty.