ALLEGED MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18510, 22 March 1922, Page 5

ALLEGED MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.

MASONIC INFLUENCE ALLEGED. (Rub United Press Association.) GISBORNE, March 2L In the ease of Hugh Paterson v. the National Piano Co. (Auckland), a claim for £3OOO damages for alleged malicious prosecution arising from the arrest of plaintiff for the alleged theft of a piano, plaintiff, in cross-examination, maintained that he had an arrangement under which he was entitled td dispose of the piano, accounting to the company for time-payments. Henry Matthew Choveaux. a witness for plaintiff, deposed that Lock, manager of the defendant company,_ had asked him in a letter to remember going to Paterson and delivering a letter to him. All the suggestions in the letter were new to him. Cross-examined, he said he replied that he had vague recollections of a letter sent byLock marked “Private and Confidential.” and indicated that both belonged to the Masonic fraternity. His Honour: Is it such a fraternity as would condemn that sort of thing? Mr M. Myers (for plaintiff): Most certainly. In answering Mr Johnstone (counsel for the defence), Witness said ho would not expect anyone in the fraternity to commit any crime. His Honour: Whether the letter asks him to commit perjury or not, it is important. Mr Johnstone: It is recognised that the letter was not right, and defendant is prepared to face the consequences. Mr Myers said the Court had not appreciated why he had suppressed a portion of the letter. His Honour: He had no right whatever to use that in a business letter. Witness further said that he had written to Lock and abused the Masonic brotherhood by disparaging the business when witness was in his hour of need. Witness had written that he could not believe it, as it was too despicable to comprehend aa an act of a Mason. The letter concluded: “As a Masonic brother, I demand your respect and confidence.”