“THE UNSPEAKABLE SCOT.”

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXVII, Issue 5372, 3 September 1904, Page 13

“THE UNSPEAKABLE SCOT.”

BEFORE THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS, LORD JUSTICE STIRLING, AND LORD JUSTICE MATHEW. "LOVELY WOMAN.” Mr Thomas William Hodgson Crosland, of Chobham, author of "The Unspeakable Scot” and "Lovely AVonian,” applied for a now trial of the action against, the Dorset Publishing Company (Limited), against which ho had claimed damages for an alleged libel contained in a review of “Lovely AVoman," which appeared in tho columjis of the “St. James’s Gazette.” Air Zi. A. Cohen, for Air Croslaml, explained that at the trial before Mr Justice Grantham, the jury found a verdict for the defendants, and the grounds of the appeal were misdirection by the learned judge; that befo’ro ho summed up lie handed Ihe jury a copy of lire book in question, and told them to read two specified pages, and that ho lid nut “-G----plain that whatever view they U-ok c-f tho book, or those two pages, could not affect the libel, but could cmy go to damages. . Mr Crosland had had some connection with the "St. James’s Gazette,” which baa apparently been broken off. ■There is one passage in Mr Crosland*!? book which wc can partially agree with in one. sentence; "When X look out upon life in my calmest moments I am prone to wish that all women were widows. If they were the amount of human suffering on tho earth would, to say tho least, be schsibly reduced. And ■when one went a* wooing or n-wedding, one would be appreciated at one’s true worth. The courting of widows would appear to bo a much less nervous matter-than the courting ot maids. As a rule it is rapider and more economical. If you say to a widow ‘Wilo thou bo mine V after a ten minutes* acquaintance sho neither faints nor calls for the police. It is not sc with maids/* j All the last part (said the reviewer) is merely a prosy watered-down version of a certain coarse rhyme of an Elizabethan date which may be found in the notes to some version of "Hudibras/* If true it is of no particular profoundity. But when we thjnk of Mr Crosland, even in his ‘'calmest moments** as a prospective (and possibly actual) husband, we are inclined to agree that if on© woman at any rate were a widow '‘the amount of human suffering .on tho earth would, to say the least of it, be sensibly reduced/* Plaintiff alleged that these words | meant, anil were understood to mean, that his character, temper, and disposition were calculated to render the life of his wife a burden, which would be alleviated by his death, and that he was a man iinfit for married life.

While admitting publication of tho words complained of, tho defendants pleaded that they did not bear, nor were intended to bear, the meaning alleged, nor were capable of any defamatory meaning. It was further pleaded that they formed part of a critical article, that they were fair and bona fide comment upon a matter of public interest, viz., the contents of the book and the opinions put forward therein, that they had no reference to the private life or character of tho paintiif, and that they were written without malice. Lord Justice Mathew: What's the sting of the paragraph? Mr Cohen: It is capable of a libellous meaning—that if he were dead it would be better for his wife. (Laugther.) Lord Justice* Mathew: That's provisional, and conditional, and prospective. (Larighter.) Was this gentleman married?—Yes. And this is supposed to be a libel on bis wife?—On both of them. • Mr Cohen said Mr Justice Grantham led the jury to believe that if they thought the book was indecent or vulgar the “St. James's Gazette" was entitled to say anything it liked about the author. Lord Justice Mathew: Y r ou say it imputes to tho plaintiff that he is a bad husband ? Mr Cohen; Y'es. (His lordship laughed;. Counsel said the gist of the two pages of the book handed to the jury was that women were ashamed nowadays of bearing largo families, whereas they used to be proud of it. The learned judge apparently thought it was an incentive to women to have small families,.whereas it was the reverse. Lord Justice Mathew; One- interpretation of the libel was that it would be a blessing if we were relieved of the literary efforts of a gentleman like this, and, there- i fore, when, ho calls attention to these passages in tho book it is perfectly legitimate. Mr Cohen said at the trial Mr Orosland was asked if he had an intimate acquaintance with the landladies of Karas-' gate, where the book was written. That was meant to suggest that he had had immoral relations with the landladies of Ramsgate. (Laughter.) Mr Gill, K.C. (for the defendants): The context of the cross-examination would show that it was not so. Mr Cohen thought it was grossly unfair for the judge to hand the pages to the jury and say that that was the character of the whole book. •> Lord Justice Mathew: I can understand that the learned judge did not wist to repeat in public* anything so disgusting, so he handed it down. Without calling on Mr Gill, their lordships dismissed the appeal. The Master of the Rolls said that the critic was entitled to express his opinion on a book as literature, but he was not entitled to go behind its merits as literature and embark on a discussion of the private merits or demerits of the author. Lord Justice Mathew added that the review was fair criticism, though very pungent and very unpleasant.