ALLEGATION OF SLANDER

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21573, 18 August 1933, Page 11

ALLEGATION OF SLANDER

EASTBOURNE BOROUGH EVIDENCE FOR DEFENCE NO DISHONESTY SUGGESTED [iSY XKLKG U A I'll —I'ItKSS ASSOCIATION"] WELLINGTON, Thursday The bearing was continued in the Magistrate's Court to-day of the case in which C. L. Bishop, town clerk of Eastbourne, claimed .(J3OO damages for alleged slander from A. T. It. Duncan, a member of tho Eastbourne Borough Council. Further evidence was given for plaintiff concerning statements which defendant was alleged to have made at a public meeting. The allegation by plaintiff was that defendant, at a public meeting, used tho words that meant that plaintiff had taken benzine, the property of the council, in excess of the free allowance and without paying for such excess, thereby committing theft as a servant. Mr. Leicester, counsel for defendant, said that defendant had been engaged in municipal affairs for more than 20 years. Ho was a man who did not hesitate to express an opinion or perform an act if he thought it in the interests of the people whom he desired to serve. Defendant believed that the administration of a certain department was faulty and that it was an abuse of the system that plaintiff should bo able to purchase petrol through the council for less than he could purchase it elsewhere. Defendant made no direct allegation of theft, and had not used words whicli would support any such allegation. Counsel applied for a nonsuit, on the ground that the remarks of defendant were fair comment and that tho words used enjoyed qualified privilege. The magistrate reserved decision on this point. Margaret Magill, deputy-mayor of Eastbourne, giving evidence, said the impression sho gained at tho meeting was that Duncan wanted to stop plaintiff from receiving petrol supplies at the council garage. She did not receive the impression that defendant charged plaintiff with theft of petrol. A general looseness of the system was the thing referred to, Defendant, in evidence, said the main portion of his address had been directed to the maladministration of services generally and particularly the bus department. He was satisfied that Bishop had been completely honest in his benzine transactions. Defendant had not char god him with dishonesty.. Leonard Charles ltoffe, clerk in the office of the Eastbourne Borough Council, said he remembered a Government audit inspector visiting the office. Tho auditor had gone away beforo the audit was completed and had returned again. Mr. Leicester: Did you receive instructions concerning somo papers?— Yes. I was told to take a sack of papers down to tho Cobar to bo burnt. Mr. Leicester: After the auditor had been and beforo he returned? —Yes. Counsel: Were some of these papers running sheets? —I could not say definitely what was in tho bag. Counsel: Did you seo some running sheets under a desk at the time of the first visit? —Yes.

Counsel: Were they there at the time of tho second visit of the auditor? —No. After further evidence on behalf of defendant, the caso was adjourned until Monday.