UNUSUAL LIBEL CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17347, 19 December 1919, Page 11

UNUSUAL LIBEL CASE.

MILITARY HOSPITAL STAFF. I IMPUTATIONS RESENTED. {JOINT CLAIM MADE FOB £2200. } [BI TELEGRAPHOWN COERESrONDKHT.I HAMILTON. Thursday. * "An action, in which £220 damages was J claimed for an alleged libel was heard by t Mr. Justice Cooper in the Supreme Court i to-day. c The plaintiffs were Staff-Sergeant-Major ]. Charles Dorigac and 21 non-commissioned . officers of the King George Hospital, Roto- , rua. and the defendants were Robin t Adair Gardner, printer, Rotorua, William < Alfred Styak, solicitor, Auckland, and * Ellen Amine Gardner, widow, Rotorua, proprietors of the Rotorua Chronicle. Mr. » Hunt appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. 1 Finlay for the defendants. 1 The statement of claim set forth that ' on September 16, 1919, the defendants ' falsely printed and published of the plain- ( tiffs the following:—" A complaint to the ; editor. Sir, —I am on a visit to Rotorua < after four years in. the war zone. I was ] greatly astonished to meet some of the 1 men here on duty at the King George s Hospital who have never left New Zea- i land, and on making inquiries I found that ! not one of the men carrying stripes- had been anywhere near the fighting area. I also inquired what qualifications entitled them to promotion, but the answer I invariably received was that they were able to play some kind of musical instrument and were therefore to become members of the hospital: band.' I also found that a few were qualified, on account of having had a trip in a hospital ship. I was informed thai it was almost impossible to obtain returned soldiers for hospital work, but I reckon the cause' is not tar to seek, as a returned soldier who is worth the name, would absolutely refuse to work under non-commissioned officers who are merely loafers on tie Government, at «. salary- most of them never dreamt of before the war. I also learned that the non-oommissioned officers had almost killed one another in the rush to »ign on for three years. But if the Returned Soldiers' Association do not have an inquiry into this matter they are neglecting their duty to some of their comrades who could manage a light job, but not to bo ordered about by the kinds of home service Don-commissioned officers I have met at the King George Hospital. am, etc., T. 0. Wilson, Brighton Road, Remuera."' Plaintiffs alleged that the words were published in the Rotorua Chronicle; that they were understood to refer to the plaintiffs that the words meant that none of the plaintiffs had been on active service; thai the plaintiffs had shirked or, by improper means, avoided military service; that they were unfit or unqualified to hold their positions; and by reason of the publication plaintiffs alleged they had been injured in their reputation, and had been brought into public cdiura. They claimed £2200, being £100 for. each of the plaintiffs. ' '.•. ' Evidence was given by a number of the plaintiffs as to the circumstances leading up to their receiving positions at Rotorua. The majority said 1 they- had made frequent, applications to go to the front, but were not allowed to do so for various reasons. They had gained their stripes by examination. Several bad been overseas, and one had served in the South African war, and held the King and Queen's Medals and seven clasps. In cross-examination moat of them admitted that disabled men could do the work they were doing,' but claimed they had to do whatever was "allotted to them. They denied they held easy jobs, and said they had not agreed to work for a period. They would be glad to get back to civil life. ' George Robert' Watts, a sergeant, employed at the hospital, said he was 55 years of age. He enlisted in 1916, and went into camp, where he remained for two years, and was then transferred to Rotorua. Before the war he earned about "356 per week as a stationer. At the hospital he was engaged on sanitation and | fly control under Professor Kirk. j Cross-examined, he said >he had been frequently insulted in Rotorua over the publication.of the alleged libel. His duties consisted in waging war on the flies in various institutions. The defence, was that the article was fair comment. ' : Further evidence will, be taken tomorrow. |. ■•