DAMAGES CLAIM

Southland Times, Issue 22041, 14 June 1933, Page 8

DAMAGES CLAIM

.— — SLANDER ALLEGED SALE OF A FORMULA HEARING ADJOURNED (Per United Press Association.) Wellington, June 13. The libel action against J. D. Sievwright was continued to-day. Mr H. F. O’Leary, for the defendant, said the formula had been prepared by Riddle, an analytical chemist, and he and plaintiff had sold it to a company which was registered as the Nados Company. The sale of the formula was the complete sale of all rights connected with it; it belonged wholly to the Nados Company and when Boddy was getting money on it in Wellington he was acting fraudulently. Counsel submitted that when a general charge of dishonesty was made and not a specific charge on a certain date it was sufficient for a plea of justification to prove that plaintiff had actqd as it was alleged even although the defendant did not have knowledge of these acts at the time he made his allegations. Evidence on behalf of defendant was given by Ralph Neville White, solicitor of Auckland. He said that his firm acted for the Ideal Loan Company. Plaintiff Boddy in May,. 1929, owed the company £lO5. He paid £25 in cash and gave the company a bill of sale over certain chattels for the balance. In May, 1930, plaintiff- was located in Christchurch, and after the summons had been issued plaintiff wrote to the secretary of the company admitting he owed the money and had sold the chattels mentioned in the bill of sale.

When Mr Evans Scott. was crossexamining witness on various bills of sale executed by plaintiff, his Honour interposed: “Well, all the juggling in the world won’t get over the admission made by this man in his own handwriting. He gave a bill of sale over a truck and certain furniture and then sold them, which is absolutely illegal and a criminal act. He cleared out with the money leaving the mortgagee behind.” Evidence was given by Marguerite Helen Miller regarding an agreement with Boddy which she signed. William Thompson Neill, retired public servant of Wellington, said he was offered a one-sixth share in the business for £75. He subsequently toox a twelfth share for £37 10/-. He considered Boddy had not been straight and honest. There was occasion on which he had not been entirely truthful in view of witness’s knowledge today. Boddy did not tell feim the true position of affairs. He considered he was misled by Boddy. After hearing other . evidence the hearing was adjourned till to-morrow.