MR GLADSTONE’S CHARACTER

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19905, 27 September 1926, Page 12

MR GLADSTONE’S CHARACTER

AUTHOR EXPELLED FROM CLUB. RECOVERS £125 DAMAGES. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, July 30. Captain Peter Wright’s action against the proprietors of tho Bath Club ended in a verdict for the plaintiff. The case arose out of references made by the plaintiff in his book “Portraits and Criticisms” to the late Mr William Ewart Gladstone, to which Viscount Gladstone took strong objection in correspondence which appeared in the press. Tho plaintiff was expelled from the flub, of which Lord Dosbqrough is (he president, under a rule which it was claimed authorised expulsion for conduct considered by tho committee to be in jurious to tho character and interests of tho club. He submitted, through his counsel, that there had been a breach of rules, in that he was expelled without inquiry, and without any charge having boon properly formulated against him, upon material which ought never to have been accepted, and .-ithout his having had an opportunity of stating his case to tho com mitteo. . . Summing up, his lordship reminded the jury that the first thing to_ consider in the case was the cause of action the pjaintiff relied upon He said he amerce, into a contract with a limited company that, upon payment of entrance fee and subscription, lie should be entitled to use the club premises unless ho was properly expelled. “It is a fundamental principle of English justice,” proceeded nl= Lordship, “that a man should never be condemned unheard, and when authority is vested id the committee of a club, which is of a quasi-judicial character, the -liould recognise the fact that they are placed in a judicial position, and must approach the subject free from bias, and be prepared to listen to everything that can be said upon it. This committee has done nothing of the kind, and therefore the plaintiff is entitled to sav that it ,iao broken its contract with him, and that, therefore, be is entitled to damages.” ACCUSATIONS AGAINST PUBLIC MEN. Dealing with the history of the case, his Lordship observed that the jury was dealing, in tho late Mr Gladstone, \yith a great public character. “It is all very well ” ho said, in reference to Sir John Simon’s address, “to ask you what you would say if anything was aid about your fathers. It may be that your fathers have never chosen to court publicity. A public man courts publicity, and while he gets the emoluments and rewards ot his great position, he also lays himself open to public criticism. This is a cv-irg^ vyhore man has occupied a groat public position, and where his family must put up with all proper criticism upon him a* a public man, and upon his private character, so far as it reflects upon his public position. The plaintiff has chosen to say that what he wrote about Mr Gladstone was true. Yon have no evidence before you to say that that statement is not true. Yon cannot, I should think, judge whether it is true or whether it is not. Lnt it was levelled by this man, who you heard m tho box obstinately say: It is true. LANGUAGE OF THE PANTRY. Sir John Simon had complained that, in replying to Lord Gladstone’s letters, describing him (tho plaintiff) as a liar, a coward, and a fool, the plaintiff had replied saying that his lordships letter " savoured more of the pantry than the House of Lords.” It might be, proceeded his Lordship, that Lord Gladstone was very angrv, and the jury might think his letter contained a very strong collection of expressions, and that the man who ieeeived it might think that the language was not improperly described as being language of the pantry. Lord Gladstone might he justified in using language ot the pantry, but it was very strong language indeed. It was also said that when he was ashed if he were going to bring a libel action against Lord Gladstone on ms letter. Captain Wright replied that he would give his lordship some of the royal tics from his hook. The plaintiff, however said he had no recollection of saying that; that he did not believe he had said it; and that if ho did it was in had taste. As to the reference to Mr Gladstones “ seraglio,” attributed to tlic late Lord Milner, and said to refer to the women of Mr Gladstone’s own family, Captain Wright had said that in conversation with him Lord Milner had used the same expression in quite a different sense. The jury was about half an hour considering its verdict, and on its return to court the foreman announced that it had found in favour of the plaintiff, and awarded him £IOO damages for the loss of tho amenities of the Hub and £25 for injury to reputation. TARGETS OF THE LIBELLER. “ It is, of course, a matter of common knowledge,” says the Daily Mail in a loading article. “ that 40 or 50 years ago tales of the kind which Captain Wright appears to have swallowed were current at street corners. Such legends have always circulated about the private characters of great men. Tho Roman historians are full of them, yet most of them are obviously false. Tho Rolliad devoted a whole section to insinuations against William Pitt, which arc transparently untrue, and probably were never meant to be believed. As for the famous Duke of Wellington, even in his life he wafi a constant target for the libeller until ho told the notorious Mrs Harriot Wilson to ‘ publish and bo damned,’ when she threatened to print ‘ revelations ’ about him. “ The truth about Mr Gladstone is that lie was one of tho most upright Ammeters in an age rich in groat men. Whatever evidence may be gathered from vague tittle-tattle concerning him, we have never heard it mentioned, much less justified, by an- responsible person. But even if Cap tain Wright felt it his duty to publish it, and considered himself capable of defending the publication before a jury of critics and men of letters, his behaviour when he was challenged by the relatives of the dead statesman was altogether deplorable. In our opinion, the committee of the club to which lie belonged was well justified in taking notice of his conduct, especially ns tho offended party was a member of tho same Hub.”