"MARRIETTE" SOCIETY SCANDAL

Southland Times, Issue 16844, 21 September 1911, Page 7

"MARRIETTE" SOCIETY SCANDAL

In the Nisi Prius Court at Manchester Assizes on July IS, before Mr Justice Horrldgo, damages for libel were claimed against the Amalgamated Press, Limited, by Miss Irene Chester, tobacconist and money-lender, Rochdale road. The libel complained of was in the following paragraph advertising a novel appearing In ‘Answers’: — SELLING FAMILY SECRETS. “I want you to provide us witli ail the scandalous tit-bits you can pick up. I will pay you well for them, and, so long as you continue to act as one of my secret correspondents, I will allow your loan to run out.” So says Marrietto, of “Society Scandal." otherwise Miss Chester, moneylender, to Rachael Fleming, one of her victims, who was, perforce, to accept tiie offer. The paragraph then referred the reader to the “terrible results of prying out family skeletons, as disclosed in the enthralling novel ‘The Scandalmonger,’ by Douglas Wolshe published in ‘Answers’ Library.” Mr Langdon (for the plaintiff) said that the immediate effect of the publication of the paragraph was that the plaintiff’s business fell off, people reading' that It referred to the plaintiff. When the plaintiff complained to. the defendants their solicitors replied that the person mentioned in the paragraph was purely imaginary, and that the reference could not be to her, as the imaginary characters were supposed to live in London. But there was nothing in the paragraph in ’Answers’ to show the place of residence. The plaintiff, in evidence, said that in May, the month following the appearance of the paragraph, her turnover in tlie money-lending business was £4. In the previous May is was £BO. Mr Ilemmorde (for the defence) said that when ’The Times’ made the disclosures about the offered temptations to people to pry into family secrets, a sub-edilor of ‘Answers’ thought the theme would make a good story, and a plot having been suggested, an arrangement was made with an author. It was ridiculous to suggest that tlie Miss Chester of tho story, who was lending to members of the smart set in London, was tiie Miss Chester who was landing sums of £2 or £3 to working men in Manchester. It was also ridiculous to say that Miss Chester's business fell off because intending borrowers read tlie paragraph. Mr Douglas Welshe, the author of the story, in evidence, slated that lie never heard of the plaintiff before this case. The Judge directed Hie jury to consider. in tlie first place, whether any reasonable person would conclude that the plaintiff was referred to in the advertisement. A verdict was found for the plaintiff for £75, and judgment was given accordingly.