ACTION FOR LIBEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19860, 2 February 1928, Page 14

ACTION FOR LIBEL.

CASE FROM WHAKATANE. RANGER AND RESIDENT. BAD LANGUAGE ALLEGED. Letters written by a retired civil engineer to the Whakatane Borough Council and the. Whakatane County Council in August and July of last year formed the subject of an action for libel in the Supreme Court yesterday. The sum of £2OO was claimed for the first alleged libel and £SOO for the second. The plain'tiff was Alexander George Anderson Mc'lavish, of Whakatane, ranger and pound keeper of the Whakatane County (Mr. Chalmers), and the defendant George Samuel Whiteside, retired civil engineer (Mr. Hogben). The case was heard by Mr. Justice lteea. It was claimed that in a letter dated August 12, 1927, the defendant wrote to the Whakatane Borough Council: "Should any garden gate be open the harassed animals give trouble, while their bullying, insolent driver (meaning the plaintiff) takes Scotch leave to trespass in pursuit over private land." In a letter dated July 26, .1927, to the Whakatane County Council defendant referred to plaintiff's "most abusive and objectionable manner" and alleged' that plaintiff ened me with personal violence and called me all the vile, filthy and insulting names he could think of.' The ' defence was that the statements in the letters were true in substance and in fact and that the expressions of.opinion in them were fair comment made in good faith. Malice was denied. The clerk of the Whakatane County Council, H. R. Robinson, gave evidence as (o a series of complaints received against the plaintiff McTavish. He admitted having written a letter officially to McTavish, cautioning him against dealing with the public in a high-handed manner and asking hirn to refrain from using bad language in a,ny circumstances. The plaintiff, in evidence, said certain of those who had made complaint against him had been convicted of assaulting him and using obscene language to him. Three informations laid by defendant against witness were dismissed. Witness stated that when two horses ho was impounding strayed on to defendant's property, defendant shut the gate on them and refused to let witness take them away. Defendant was afterwards fined £5 for interfering with impounding. In cross-examination witness said he could not say he never swore. "I suppose you could not drive cattle without swearing," commented His Honor. Eldred Dunstan, farmer, said the plaintiff hid tried to impound cattle when witness was driving them home and had used very vile language to him and to others who were present. A similar account of this rfffair was given by Alexander Murray, who, said plaintiff had been very aggressive. After' further evidence the case was adjourned until this morning.