ALLEGED LIBEL

Northern Advocate, 7 July 1926, Page 4

ALLEGED LIBEL

SECOND EDITION

£SOOO DAMAGES CLAIMED,

ECHO OF GENERAL ELECTION,

(Special to “Northern Advocate.”) AUCKLAND, This Day. An action for £SOOO damages was com moncod this morning 'before Mr. Justice Stringer and a special jury, Alfred Hall Skelton, barrister and solicitor, suing Henry Hastings Seabrook and Thomas Farrell, printers, for alleged libel contained in printed matter during the 1925 election campaign.

■Sir John Findlay, K.C., and Mr. C. AY. Inder represent plaintiff. Mr. G. P. Finlay and Mr. H. M. Rogerson the 1 defendants. ■ . It is alleged that on October 2S, 1925, the defendants falsely and maliciously printed and published inthe form of a circular, headed-“ Protestant Political Association of New Zealand,” and signed “H. H. Seabrook, president -of Roskill Group,” the following:—■

“To members of the group.—Since Roskill became an electorate six years ago the association has consistently supported Vivian H. Potter, not be-

! cause of party affiliations, but on acj count of his staunch support of the I principles advocated by the P.P.A. J Each elector is now called upon to j consider which candidate at the com- ! ing election will give effect to the ,■ principles, of equal rights best for all, j special privileges to none. Mr. Potter j has shown himself true to his pledges j in his readiness to speak in Parliament | j in advocacy aj)d defence of those prin- 1 j eiples. He is again opposed by • Mr. I | Hall Skelton, one whose declared ami bitions is to smash the P.P.A., that he I I ■ \ will willingly wreck the only organisa- j tion pledged to groat democratic prinj eiples. This declaration will no doubt I I again secure Mr. Hall Skelton the j ° I s I Roman Catholic vote, usually given : | where it will best serve its interests, I I whatever the effect on the country, j \ It cannot be forgotten that Mr. Hall j [ Skelton acted as representative of the | | party seeking to disintegrate the Em- j pire, ’having publicly’ eulogised Michael Collins, who was the leader of a gang j of atrocious murderers, and con -1 demited to hang for crimes against the j Empire. Thoughtful men and women, j recalling such things, cannot surely, choose as their representative a man! who has manifested sympathy with [ those who, when the Empire was in tire ( throes of a life struggle, were engaged; within it in a policy of murder to j hinder the prosecution of the Great I War and secure the Empire’s over-1 throw.”. ' ! Plaintiff contended that the circular,: meant that he was disloyal, in sym- \ pathy with murderers, and identified * himself with, and shared, the views of a party seeking to bring about the disintegration of the Empire and to hinder the’ people in the prosecution ■ of the recent war against Germany and ( Austria. A second cause of action alleged that on the same date the defendants j falsely and maliciously published a cir- 1 cular headed ‘ 'Hall Skelton and Ros- j kill Electors.” “Extract from New j

Zealand Sentinel, October 1, 1925.” “Hall Skelton as he is known.” Plaintiff contended that the circular set him out as being disloyal, that he was a representative of, identified with and in sympathy with persons who held murder to be a sacrecf duty, and'who

were engaged in treasonable practices. On the first cause plaintiff claimed £2OOO damages and on the second cause £3OOO. The defence was a denial of printing or publication, but that, if published, the words were not intended to mean what was alleged and were not defamatory or - libellous, publication being privileged, plaintiff suffered no damage.

EVIDENCE TAKEN. Several witnesses gave evidence as to the distribution of , alleged libellous circulars. Plaintiff was called shortly before luncheon.

•Sir John Findlay, in opening, said the case would - not give the jury much difficulty. Farrell was more or less a technical defendant, there being no grudge' against him.- . Unfortunately a certain element of sectarianism grossly ■ disfigured ‘ the action during the campaign. IIVJr Skelton studiously avoided =- reference - to the P.P.A.’ or ' the - defendant Seabrook, but a ; few days pri,o.r to' the election the latter tired four shots, malignant in its entirety, in the form of a circular containing wild and bitter wordS'. iNot content, Seabrook the same day printed and.- published an extract from the New Zealand Sentinel. the jury was not dealing with an irresponsible man, Seabrook doing the same thing three years , before. Here was a man clipping his hand into the most -’vitriolic stuff anddisplaying energy in distributing his efforts among the people with amazing generosity. It was important to note that where malice amounts to almost a crime a jury should award heavy damages. There was long cool deliberation, leaving Seabrook no escape. In the course of his address Sir John Findlay mentioned that Seabrook shortly after the election was convicted of a breach of the Electoral Act. Criticising the defence, counsel observed that it really meant that it was hopeless for Seabrook to rely on it. ,