SLANDER ACTION

Southland Times, Issue 24162, 26 June 1940, Page 2

SLANDER ACTION

Claim By Proprietor Of Pie Cart

INCIDENT AT RACES Allegations of theft of money at the Invercargill races on January 3 were made during the hearing of an action for slander in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr R. C. Abernethy, S.M. William Graham, pie-cart proprietor, of Invercargill, claimed £25 from John Rattray, a retired carpenter, of Collingwood, Invercargill, alleging that a false and malicious statement about the plaintiff had been made by the defendant in a cafe at Invercargill on April 13. Mr I. A. Arthur appeared for the plaintiff and Mr J. C. Prain for the defendant. The case was unfinished when the Court rose.

Christopher Larris, proprietor of the Britannia Cafe, said that on April 13 the plaintiff was sitting in the cafe. John Rattray came in and asked for stewed oysters and then he pointed to Graham and said: “There is the who robbed me.” He made the statement three times. There were nine or 10 persons in the cafe. Rattray started to use bad language and the witness called the police to have him removed. The words were spoken in a loud voice clearly audible to all in the cafe.

To Mr Prain, the witness said Graham had been sitting at the first table on the left and Rattray at the second on the right. Mr Prain: You are a great friend of Graham’s?—Oh, no. I know him well. He has the pie-cart and I have the Britannia Cafe. Everyone looks to his own business.

The witness said Rattray was very drunk. Graham just sat quietly and listened to Rattray. Graham ■ often came to the cafe for a meal. Some time later Graham told the witness there would be a court case about the incident and his solicitor called a few days ago. Rattray had picked up a knife and made to go towards Graham, but the witness had pushed him back in his chair.

To the Magistrate, the witness said there could be no doubt whom Rattray was referring to because Graham was sitting alone in the corner. The witness told Rattray he would be in trouble, and Rattray said he liked to be in trouble. NON-SUrr SOUGHT This concluded the evidence for the plaintiff and Mr Prain asked for a nonsuit. He contended that there was no proof that Rattray, who was intoxicated, was referring to Graham. It was pure conjecture that Rattray was speaking of Graham.

The Magistrate held that a prima facie case had been established and dismissed the application for a nonsuit.

The defendant gave evidence that he had known Graham for 25 years. He had assisted Graham financially. He had been with Graham at the Invercargill races on January 3 last, having met him on the course. The defendant took between £35 and £4O to the races. He did not lose any money until the last race when he lost £5. Graham had two bottles of gin which they finished and he then got two bottles of whisky in which the defendant participated. The defendant did not remember leaving the course, but next morning he found he had no money left except for 2/2 in his waistcoat pocket. He went to see Graham and asked if he had taken his money. Graham said he had not done so and the defendant asked him how he got home. Graham said he had put him in a taxi and had gone out in a taxi himself to the Wallacetown Hotel. The defendant asked Graham to find out what taxi he had been sent home in. Later Graham said he had found out and that the particular driver was the biggest thief in New Zealand. The defendant wanted to go to the police, but Graham advised him not to do so.

Later, because of what he was told, the defendant went to Graham and said he had learned that Graham had taken his money. Graham denied it, but agreed to meet the defendant next day and have an interview with his informant. Next morning Graham said he had since learned he had taken £l5 from the defendant. Graham and the defendant had an interview with a man Jenkinson, who said Graham took four notes from the defendant. Graham said there was a doubt about the amount, but paid over £l5, promising to pay the balance if he found he had taken more. Until this time Graham had. consistently denied taking the money and had led Rattray to believe that another person had taken it. The defendant wrote to Graham demanding the balance of the money and threatening proceedings. He received a letter dated February 26 from Hanan and Arthur, solicitors, inviting him to be present at an interview with Graham and a detective to discuss statements which he had made about Graham.

INCIDENT IN CAFE On April 13, the defendant said, he saw Graham in the Britannia Cafe and he became excited. He admitted using bad language and he regretted doing so, but he did not regret accusing Graham of being a thief. To Mr Arthur, the defendant said he was at the Invercargill races on November 18. It was quite possible that he was drunk.

“If you ask me who made me drunk I will tell you it was Graham,” said the defendant. “On that occasion also he supplied the whisky. The only two occasions in the last five years that I have been drunk at the races were in company with Graham.” I The defendant said he wrote to Graham demanding the return of the additional money and saying that he would issue proceedings. On a previous occasion he lent Graham a horse, but when the defendant sent his boy to get the horse Graham sent word that he had sold it. He referred to this incident in the letter, he sent to Graham when he said the racecourse incident was the second “steal” he had made.

William Jenkinson, dye works proprietor, said he was cloak-room attendant at the Invercargill races. After the races he was with Constable England and saw Graham endeavouring to get Rattray to go home. Rattray was very drunk, but Graham was sober. Graham put a bottle of whisky down and invited the women in the tea-room to come and get it. Graham and Rattray fell down. Graham pulled Rattray up, put his hand in Rattray’s pocket and pulled out some notes, He counted out four notes and waved them at the women in the tea-room. Graham got Rattray away latex- and they left in separate taxis. Several days later he received a visit from Graham and Rattray. Graham said he had been to see O' woman who told him of the incident on the racecourse. He said he remembered everything except taking the money. He did not suggest he had been drunk at the races. He said there was some doubt whether there had been three or four £5 notes.

At this stage the case was adjourned until Friday.