LIBEL ACTION.

Otago Witness, Issue 3101, 20 August 1913, Page 5

LIBEL ACTION.

ECHO OF THE WAIHI STRIKE. £SOO DAMAGES AWARDED. AUCKLAND, August 12. Tho publication of the pamphlet entitled “ The Tragic Story of the Waihi Strike ” concerning incidents connected with tho Waihi industrial disturbance, resulted in a claim for £IOOO - damages for alleged libel being heard 1 by Mr Justice Cooper at tne Supremo Court to-day. The plaintiff was Thomas Walsh, of Auckland, and the defendant the New Zealand Federation of Labour. Mr J. R. Psecd, K.C., with him Mr Newton, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr P. J. O’Regan for tho defendant.

The alleged libellous words complained of in the pamphlet included the following: “ It is to be emphasised and recorded, for the consolation of every ‘turning-down’ professor, Labour partyite, and New Zealand and Sydney trades councillor, that the socalled Engine-drivers’ Union, for which they fought and whoso apostacy they applauded, volunteered for scabbery before the reopening of tho mines, and later on was at work in Waihi while thousands were on strike. There is no plainer instance of scabbery in all its rotten chronicles, and in the ranks of tho Labour party were two notorious strike-breaking advocates and organisers (W. P. Black and T. Walsh), not then repudiated by tlie party nor expelled from it Those two stood convicted. Their colleagues stood craven.” Plaintiff was further described as an “organiser of scabs” and a

" person who hud glorified the police and employers and befouled tho strikers.” It was alleged that in consequence of those wqrds plaintiff had been greatly injured in his credit and reputation.

The defence denied that the words were being published falsely and maliciously, or that they were capable of any defamatory meaning. The words were made by way of fair comment. They were fair expressions of opinion on matters of public interest, and wore made by way of reply to statements published in the Voice of Labour. After a retirement of over an hour the jury brought in a verdict for £SOO dauiagea. Judgment was entered accordingly, with costs on the middle scale.

Mr O Regan applied that there he a new trial, on the ground that the judge had misdirected the jury by non-direction. W T hen Mr Rccd was addressing the court Mr O’Regan had objected to the reading of certain papers. His Honor said he would direct the jury not to take tho articles in those papers into consideration when considering the amount of damages, if any. However, when summing up, his Honor said he thought the indication of his intentions was sufficient. However, he would send the jury back, so that no injustice might be done. The foreman of the jury assured Jus Honor that they did not consider the articles at all.

His Honor (to Mr O’Regan): It is useless to move a non-direction after that. Mr O’Regan: That is so. Counsel withdrew his objection.