Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A NO-LICENSE LIBEL

'DEFENDANTS CLIMB DOWN.

An action in which Thomas Molisoai Smith, journalist, of Karaka Bay, Wellington, sued Robert Wilson, Methodist minister, and Frederick Ernest McKenzie, printer, both of Dannevirke, claiming £IOOO for damages for libel, was called on before his Honor the Chief Justice on the opening of the civil sitting of the Supreme Court on Monday morning. Mr Hindmarsh appeared for the plaintiff and Mr A. R. Atkinson for the defendants.

This case had been provisionally fixed fotr Friday, but it was brought on on Monday morning in .order to announce to the Court that a settlement had been arrived at. The claim was for damages for a libel published by defendants—who were editor and printer respectively—in a no-license journal called ‘Liberty,” at Dannevirke, on August 24t-h, last year. It appears that the plaintiff. Mr Smith, was an anti-prohi-bitionist, while the defendant Mr Wilson is the secretary of the No-License League at Waipawa. On August Bth, 1904, Mr Smith delivered a public address at Dennevirke, and in commenting upon his remarks in the paper named, Mr Wilson wrote: “Mr Smith did not tell his hearers why his name does not appear on the rolls of the legal profession in the Home Land, nor wliy, after application, it has not been inserted on the rolls of the profession in this colony.”

’Ur Atkinson on Monday informed his Honor that his client had entered a plea of justification as an answer to the charge of libel. According to the findings of the Ineoiporated Law Society of England the plaintiff in this case had received certain sums of money in England for the settlement of a case on behalf of a client, and he failed to account for them on an order of the Court of the King’s Bench, in pursuance of that renort of the Incorporated Law Society, his name was struck off the rolls. On subsequent investigation, however, the defendants had found that plaint'ff’s /statement as to the manner in which this order was obtained was correct, viz., that, he was struck, off the rolls without having been given any notice of the proceedings either before the Incorporated Law Society or before the Court of Kings Bench. Under the circumstances, the defendants freely admitted that the charges should not have been made, and would not have been made if they had known the truth of the matter. They had been advised that ’they had a technical defence open to them,' but on the circumstances they had decided not to take advantage of it. They, therefore, asked leave to withdraw their plea of justification, express regret that they had made any such charge against Mr Smith, and pay his OOS+6,

Mr Hindmarsh said Ms client only wished to add to what Mr Atkinson had said, that a man named Hall, on whose complaint proceedings against Mr Smith were taken in England before the Incorporated Law Society, was examined on commission from this colony, and his evidence was before the Court. Mr Atkinson had read Hall’s evidence, and he saw that probably a very grave mistake had been made, and that Mr Smith had been deeply wronged. As a matter of fact, Mr Smith had paid the money that was in dispute twice—first to one Jones, who was Hall’s agent, and since that to Hall direct. The evidence of Hall could not substantiate any of the charges against Mr Smith, and, indeed, it looked very much as if there had been a conspiracy between Hall and Jones to extract money from Mr Smith in some way. Mr Atkinson had also said he would use his influence to prevent, these slanderous statements being repeated by the prohibitionist party Mr Atkinson : T don’t know that that would be professional. (Laughter.) Mr Hindmarsh: Well, Mr Smith has suffered enough over it. He has been in this colony for some months, and passed his examination for admission to the New Zealand legal profession, and was then —and not until then—informed that he hod been struck off the rolls in England. And that was the first he bad heard of it. It oame upon him like a thunder-dap. The case was then atm ok out.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZMAIL19050823.2.57

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1746, 23 August 1905, Page 16

Word Count
700

A NO-LICENSE LIBEL New Zealand Mail, Issue 1746, 23 August 1905, Page 16

A NO-LICENSE LIBEL New Zealand Mail, Issue 1746, 23 August 1905, Page 16

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert