LARNACH'S LIBEL ACTION.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 4911, 21 January 1889, Page 3

LARNACH'S LIBEL ACTION.

COMMENCED TO-DAY. (By Telegraph.) WELLINGTON, Jan. 21. In the Supreme Court, civil side, the libel action, damages £3OOO, Larnach v. proprietors of the New Zealand Herald , commenced this morning. Plaintiff says that on the 19th July 1888, defendants falsely and maliciously published articles commenting oh the departure of the plaintiff from the colony when Parliament was in session, to enter into business in Melbourne, he having first asked for leave of absence on the plea of illness in his family, and continuing to draw his honorarium, wherefore he claims £3OOO damages. Defendants admit the publication, but deny malice, and say that the subject-matter of tbe alleged libel became and was a matter of public interest, 'I hereupon they published the comments set out in the plaintiff’s statement lona fide for the public good, and without sinister or malicious motive they also deny that the said publications are libellous. SirE. Stout, instructed by Mr Buckley, and Mr Stafford for plaintiff j Mr Gully, with him Mr Skerrett, for defendants. Mr Larnach’s evidence was short. He detailed his movements during the session, and explained that he was called to Dunedin by an urgent message from the doctor attending his daughter. lie was cross-examined to show that it was the common impression that he was about to leave for Melbourne, He slated that he had given a banquet to some civil servants, and replied to gentlemen who spoke on the matter that he was going to leave the colony. He had received an apology by telegram from the defendants, but did not deem it sufficient. Dr Coughtrey was called to prove the illness of plaintiff’s daughter, but the evidence was refused admission as irrelevant.