CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVI, Issue 202, 17 July 1936, Page 2

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

BY DEFENDANTS. CASE AT ISLINGTON. Per Press Association. ' WELLINGTON, July 16. Freely disclaiming belief in the statements that had been published regarding Douglas Gibson, a member of the Seamen’s Union, the two officials against whom Gibson proceeded for £2600 damages for libel expressed their regret in a statement to the Supreme Court to-day that tho statements were published. They assured plaintiff that they had never entertained any feeling of malice towards him, and at no time had they prevented him from obtaining employment When the case was resumed to-day Mr Hay, instead of proceeding with the evidence for the defence, produced the statement, to the Judge. “The absence of a plea of justification was, in defendants’ view, an admission that the statements complained of by plaintiff were untrue, sail! Mr Hay in reading from the statement, “but having regard to the observations from the Bench that some express indication to that effect should be made defendants lreely disclaim any belief in such statements. After quoting the rest of the statement. Mr Hay said that in tho corn so of a lengthy case hist year before the Chief Justice it was stated by Walsli,' in evidence, that had Gibson come foiward at the appropriate time and shown the documentary evidence in his possession and not in the possession of the union, the course ot events might have been entirely different. So far as he was concerned the present statement was made as a gesture to plaintiff that no malice was intended. On the suggestion of the Judge the Court adjourned to allow the Judge and counsel to confer.

Following the adjournment lor counsel to confer with the Judge, conferences were held between the parties, but no statement was made when the Court resumed at 3.45 p.m. and counsel for the defence proceeded to call evidence.