£5000 DAMAGES

Southland Times, Issue 22473, 8 November 1934, Page 7

£5000 DAMAGES

LIBEL ACTION WON DECISION IN FAVOUR OF SIR O. MOSLEY JUDGE’S COMMENT (United Press Assn—Telegraph Copyright.) London, November 6. Sir Oswald Masley was awarded £5OOO damages with costs in his libel action against the Star. The Chief Justice (Lord Hewat) refused a stay of execution, and declared: “If you want a stay you must go to the Appeal Court I entirely agree with the jury s verdict.” , , Summing up, His Lordship said: “The defence, in effect, has pleaded liberty of opinion. This liberty has become a strange and fanciful thing, if it means that we are only prepared to listen to those agreeing with us. Toleration of free speech only begins when persons listen decently and fairly to opinions with which they profoundly disagree. The Star writer had not even seen the full report of Sir Oswald Mosley’s words when he wrote the leader. Did not the Star’s words mean that Sir Oswald Mosley had been guilty of a criminal offence? Did not Mr Birkett’s suggestion that the case could be met by the award of a farthing damages mean that Sir Oswald Mosley was a worthless person? Would not that be adding insult to injury? There is still upon record the defendant s plea that die words were true. If they found for the plaintiff the jury were entitled to award such sum as would not only compensate for the. injury done him, but would mark their sense of that type of journalism.”

Much Interest was taken in Sir Oswald Mosley’s libel claim against the newspaper Star. It was heard by the Chief Justice and a special jury, and arose from a public debate last year between Sir Oswald Mosley and Mr J. Maxton, M.P. The action was based on a section of a leading article, which stated: "Sir Oswald Mosley warned Mr Maxton that he and his Fascists would be ready to take over the Government with the aid of machine-guns when the moment arrived. Mr Tom Mann was recently thrown into prison on the mere suspicion that he might say something ten times . less provocative than Sir Oswald Mosley s words. The defence was that the words were substantially true and fair comment.