CLAIM FOR SLANDER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15567, 26 March 1914, Page 8

CLAIM FOR SLANDER.

THE ROTORUA CASE. WITNESSES FOR DEFENCE. "'..".'.A'', it I ' - , ;mm ■ A'M A'RTLING ' ' EVIDENCE ,[BX TELEGRAPH.—OWN" CORRESPONDENT.] Hamilton - , Wednesday. •The-Supreme Court was occupied again to-day in hearing the case brought by Eleanor Maude Pascoe, a nurse, against Dr. Bertram, of Rotorua, claiming £1060 damages for alleged slander in connection _ with her conduct of her nursing Jiome at Rotorua. .."-.'. • • When the Court resumed to-day Mr. • McVeagh stated that he would close the plaintiff's case at this stage, and the witness Robieson, who. was ordered to stand down yesterday, was not recalled. Mr. J. R. Reed, K.C., for the defendant, then frrmetly moved for a nonsuit on the ground that on each occasion the statements were privileged, and that there was no evidence of actual malice. The motion was reserved. In opening-his case for the defence Mr. Reed said there were three stages in the. case. First, the case for the plaintiff: second, the case for the defence: and third, that stage in which the plaintiff ■would call rebutting evidence, in which he would contrast.the evidence for the plaintiff as against the evidence for the defence. Dr. Bertram was a comparatively young eurgecn, extremely keen about his work, artS attentive to his patients.' Some doctors might -very' easily have got along without friction by letting the whole Jbing slide, but when they-had a man watching hit patient at every move they could understand his being irritated to a degree when he saw his endeavours being frustrated by careless and negligent nursing. Nurse Cassels came back to Rotorua about the middle of 1912 and started private nursing. About the end of 1912 she reminded 'Dr. Bertram of a promise to assist her if sac started a private nursing home ✓Dr. Bertram, though in no way bound to Nurse Pascoe, had been sending patients to her home, which was originally started by Dr. Crook. He felt sorry for Nurso Paceoe, and was therefore in a quandary. Dr. Bertram did not question Nurse Pascoo's ability. What he did object to was that she would not carry out his instructions, and was careless and negligent in her attention to the patients. Mr.' Reed then wad some of the evidence .connection with that would be startling, and ho referred to particular instances of a sensational character. . Mr. McVeagh held that the defence was not entitled to introduce charges of which no notice had been given. After a lengthy discussion His Honor admitted Mr. Reed's line of defence. Mr. Reed said that he would bring evidence to prove that every person called near Rotorua who was capable of being fot at had been visited by the nurse and Irs: Rhodes. Not- only so, but attempts had been made to coerce them. They had been told what would be done to them if they came and gave evidence. If what the witnesses would say was true it was simply scandalous. After stating that one of the cases he had already referred to was the "scandal" to which Dr. Bertram referred at the meeting in Mr. Rhode's office, counsel argued that the action was not brought bona-fide wr the purpose of clearing plaintiff's character, 'but out of spite and a spirit of . revenge. There had been no formal application for an apology. The rest of the day was occupied by the examination of the defendant, who bore out tJiia statements of counsel and denied the' imputation that he was actuated in . WJJ way towards plaintiff by malice. As a she' had hut carrier! out Ins instructions . .»?. had withdrawn his patronage from her me'. i /;'_'_' uZ ,-- J ;. cre , a, iv. a .'' larc "umber of witnesses 'to •'be called -for the defence,