ACTION WITHDRAWN

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 304, 23 November 1937, Page 7

ACTION WITHDRAWN

DAMAGES TO DUKE OF WINDSOR V “CORONATION COMMENTARY.” ABDICATION ECHO. (United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) Received November 23, 11.15 a.m. LONDON, Nov. 22. The Duke of Windsor’s X action against Heinemann’s, publishers, in relation to “Coronation Commentary,” has been withdrawn with costs and apologies and damages which the Duke is handing over to charities. The Lord Chief Justice described the comment as “a foul, cruel libel which a jury might- think invites a thoroughly efficient horsewhipping.” The damages are not disclosed. Sir William Jowitt, K.C.. representing the Duke, said that the action concerned the libel contained in “Coronation Commentary.” The abdication of King Edward VIII. was an , event with which one chapter of the book dealt. It was perhaps inevitable in regard to such a matter that rumours should originate and grow. It was undoubtedly a fact that many statements with no justification whatever were made in regard to it, At the same time it should be clearly understood that no writer giving further currency to unfounded rumours could protect himself by the mere assertion that the rumours existed before the book was published. “Neither is he entitled to publish such rumours even though he adds, as this author frequently that there is no evidence or insu ".eient evidence to support them,” Sir William said. “The very fact that the rumpurs were repeated by responsible and respectable persons makes them more serious. It is impossible to disregard a book which in the main was written before the abdication and contains a chapter entitled ‘The Abdication,’ which it would appear from the publishers’ note, was written at a later date, possibly under pressure of an order to be ready for publication on the eve of the Coronation.” It was only fair to the defendants, added counsel, to say that in the main the reports,! rumours and suggestions were referred to only for the purpose of discrediting them, but the chapter was certainly written without due consideration for it contained such defamaory and utterly groundless allegations ■of fact as to make it necessary for the Duke of Windsor to take this action. STRONG COMMENT FROM BENCH Lord Hewart, consenting to -the withdrawal of the action, said: “In my opinion it is remarkable that any man should have permitted himself and any publisher to publish the foul, cruel libels of the subject matter in this action. There was not, even on the pleadings, any attempt to allege that the libels were true in subject or in fact. These particular libels, a jury might think, appear almost to invite a thoroughly efficient horsewhipping.” Stating that, reluctantly and hesitantly, lie allowed the action to be withdrawn, the. Lord Chief Justice observed : “It might well be that a criminal prosecution will follow; I don’t know.”