£50,000 DAMAGES!

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13996, 31 August 1907, Page 4

£50,000 DAMAGES!

A REMARKABLE ACTION,

VICTORY OF PLAINTIFF,

(From Ocr Om< Cobp.espoxdext.)

LONDON, July 19.

Some months ago the jointly-owned London papers, the Daily Mirror and the Evening News, started a crusade against Messrs Jjever Brothers, the well-known soapmakcrs, who, with other firms in tho same trade, were about- to form, for purposes of economy in wirking, a big " combine," as the Americans call it-. Various accusations were made against the "Soap 'Combine," ono being' that it attempted to ".corner" the supply of raw material, and another that it fraudulently sold its soap in alleged pound-weights each of which weighed an ounco short.

The affair proved serious enough in its effect upon the firms so assailed, and an action iov libel was accordingly brought against the proprietors of the threo papers specified. *

T'lio case was opened on Monday last at the Liverpool Assizes )>efore Mr Justice Lawrence, a vast array of eminent counsel being engaged in it. The opening speech of Sir Edward Carson, who led for the plaintiffs, occupied the whole of the first day and part of the next.. The examination and cross examination of Mr W. H. Lever, M.l\, chairman of the plaintiff company, lasted the whole of the second day, and was not coinploted, when tho court rose. Sir E. Carson, in opening the oase for the plaintiffs, said that owin" to the defendants' attacks the £2,000,000 of preference shares in the plaintiff company had. been rcdnccd in value by £200,000; it was impossible to say what the ordinary shareholders had last. Mr W. H. Lever,/plaintiff's chairman, examined by Sir E. Carson, said there was no foundation for the reports of an attempt to " corner" the supply of raw material, The 16oz cartons of soap were reduced in weight to avoid raising the price, which tho incrcaso in the price of rthv materials would otherwise have .rendered necessary. Every precaution had been taken to bring the change of weight to tho purchasers' Tho wejght was afterwards ■1 to 16oz, regardless for the moment , dor locs, to protect tho company's •. .ill at it time of public frenzy, the scodwill having been built up by two millions of money. The change of weightliad been decidcd on before, the combine was contemplated. In crtss-examination Mr Lever's evidence was not shaken in tho smallest degree, but, on the contrary, his case was actually strengthened through the questions of Mr llufus Isaacs, who led .for tho defence, bringing out facts not previously diso'.cscd, and also, it was alleged, wholly unknown to the defendants. To ail appearance the case was likely to Inst- until tho."long vacation" and the members of the jury resigned themselves to a protraoted purgatory. Then, aH of a sudden, came the biggest surprise—bigggest in moro ways than ono —in all the history of litigation. At tho opening of tho court on Wednesday, Mr Rufus Isaacs said:—"My Lord, with the assistance of mv learned friends, I have carefully considered my clients' position. In view of Mr Lever's statements on oath in tho witness-box, and the impression made both upon' mysdi ar.d my fronds, and no doubt upon the cowl, by tlioec statements, it is impossible for my clients to continue their defence upon the lines on which it lias been drawn. On their behalf, therefore, and with their full concurrence, I beg to withdraw the plea of justification. But my clients wish to do something more than this. They wish to withdraw unreservedly every imputation made upon Mr Lever's honour and integrity, and to say that they very much regret having beeii misled inlo making an attack oil him. In tho circumstances tho onlv straightforward and honourable course for a newspaper to take is to withdraw without any reservation of any sort. Having resolved upon this course, mv clients do not propose to proceed with the defence, of fair comment so far as it is applicable to the minor issues of tho ease. It is right, that tJiey should deal with the case in a generous _ and.proper spirit, and there will be no.issue for .tho jury except damages." Sir Edward Carson •. Mr Lever can accept, no compromise. For months and months an attempt has been made to blacken Mr Lever's character and tho company's. I quite appreciate my learned friend's statement, but on behalf of Mr Lever I cannot accept as mitigation any tardy retractation by the Daily Mail. Mr Lever must be allowed to go'to the jury to obtain such damages as will vindicate Ms reputation. This is no ordinary case where on a single charge of libel, or even | of malicious libel, a withdrawal of tho p?ea and an apology would be sufficient. If this were a case of that sort I should | accept the apology, but in this case wo cannot do so, and the case must go to tho jury.

Mr Rufus Isaacs: There is no question of compromise. A certain course has been taken with the full assent of my client.

Mr Justice Lawrence: If the'case is to pro to the jury I will sav no more at this etago than that I entirely approvo the coiirsQ taken by Mr Rnfus Isaacs. On the evidence before me it is tho right and proper and only honourable course to take. Sir Edward Carson: Tho course adopted bv my learned friend has taken me completely by surprise. I ask'for time to bring witnesses on the question of damages to court.

Mr Justice Lawrence: Certainly. An interval followed, during which Mir Rufus Isaacs and Sir Edward Carson were seen in conversation. Then Mr Rufus Isaacs arose and said: The defendants aro anxious to meet tlie piaintiffs Tn no mean, niggardly, or grudging spirit, Mv learned friend has mentioned to mo a 6uin formulated by Mr Lever which we are 'willing to pay. That sum is £50,000. It is paid in respect of twd actions, but my friend desires that judgment should be riven in this action for the whole of tho £50,000, and taxed costs, and in the action .wins tho Daily Mirror for taxed costs alone.

Sir Edward Carson: It is satisfactory to mo that the defendants should pay the DUm formulated by Mr Lever. Mr 'Lever was asked to namo a sum which he considered would represent, his damages. Ho said '£50,000. Tho defendants have accepted our own measure of our loss.

Mr Justice Lawrence: I am very glad tho parties have come to terms. lam confident that the defendants have ackd wisely. It was not merelv money that was at stake, but the reputation 'of tho defendants. It would bo ungracious for mo to express criticism on the articles after tho course that has been, taken. I wi'.l only say this, that, if I had been called on to deal with the articles, and if no more justification had been put forward than appeared from Mr Lever's cross-examina-tion, I_ should have dealt with them in no hesitatin" or measured manner.—(Cheers.) There will be judgment for the plaintiffs for £50,000 and taxed costs.

On leaving the St. George's Hall Mr Lever was cheered.

This sum is by far tho largest ever given .is damages for libel, yet- it is regarded as no moro than a fair measure of tho injury actually done tho plaintiff firm. Summing up the merits of the case, The Times 6ays: "In this <xi6c the. facts were not, impartially stated, and apparently had not been very carefully investigated. The interests of the accuser, too, were aganist a soap trust, which would tend to diminish the number of advertisements. . . A tendency which is becoming too marked, to snatch at anything that will form a sensational paragraph without much care about its accuracy, may on occasion lead Xo awkward complications. It is not easy to control, that habitual recklessness of statement, or to confine it to cases in wheh no one suffers except the deluded reader. Hut even this plea would hardly avail in the ■ present ease, seeing that the campaign was a deliberate and prolonged . . . We hope the lesson of this action will be taken to heart."

It is creditable to the defendants that, tliov made so complete an amende immediately tlie unsoundness of their pVcmises became clear.