SIRF. WHITAKER'S ACTION FOR LIBEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8386, 14 October 1890, Page 5

SIRF. WHITAKER'S ACTION FOR LIBEL.

[Br TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, Monday. The Chief Justice, on the application of Mr. Gully, has granted an order calling on Mr. Hutchison to answer the following interrogatories relating to the publication of his Hansard speech, and other matters affecting the Whitaker suit:—l. Was the publication in Hansard referred to in the statement of defence an acourate report of the defendant's speech as delivered ? 2. Was the reporter's transcript submitted to or perused by the defendant before the same was printed as a " proof ?" 3. Did the defendant on or after such perusal make any alteration or alterations in the said transcript ? 4. If so, what were such alterations? 5. Was the proof as printed from the transcript submitted to or perused by the defendant before it was published in Hansard? 6. Did the plaintiff make any alteration or alterations in the said proof ? 7. If so, what were such alterations ? 8. Did the defendant apply to the Speaker of the House under the Parliamentary Privileges Act, 1865, or any other Act, law, or authority, in reference to the alleged libel, or any report, paper, or document connected therewith ? 9 and 10. If so, what was the object of such application, was it in writing ? and what was the reply thereto? 11. Was the publication of tho alleged libel in Hansard issued by authority of Parliament? and if so, how, when, and by whom ? 12. Was the publication of the alleged libel in the pamphlet headed " The Indictment of the Ministry" issued by authority of Parliament? and if so, how, when, and by whom? 13. Did the defendant cause a, large number of copies to be printed in pamphlet form ? and if so, when ? 14. Did the defendant cause such copies to be headed with the words " The Indictment of the Ministry ?" 15. How many copies so headed did the defendant cause to be printed? 16. Did the defendant cause such copies to bo circulated or distributed, and, if so, how many? 17. Did the defendants cause such copies to be circulated amongst persons in the city of Auckland and elsewhere? 18. If so, amongst whom ? 19. Did the defendant in any way, other than by the circulation of the pamphlet, publish the alleged libel or any part thereof, and, if so, when, how, and to whom ? 20. Did the defendant publish to any person or persons the substance or essence of the charges made by him in the alleged libel? 21. If so, in what form and to whom ?