Lawyers and Libel Actions.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XIX, Issue 1788, 29 January 1886, Page 2

Lawyers and Libel Actions.

Actions for libel are nohspplly mnoh 100 frequent In New Zealand. Some newepapere are always getting into trouble in that way. In small oommanities soandals often ariee, and when any of the local papers tcnobes op IMMboty, agjrierod indiridutl mb* to

“his lawyer and issues a writ claiming heavy damages from thejproprietors of the offending journal. The newspapers now and then fall out with each other and a battle royal of libel actions follows. There is a paper up in Napier called the Evening News, which has been in the Law Courts lately, seeking redress and has in turn been itself made a defendant in a libel action. The Evening News became obnoxious to the big runholders, and so the Waipawa Mail, being friendly to the rnnholding interest, pitched into the News, and described it in a sort of newspaper “ skit ” as being a rather queer, fishy concern, at the same time making damaging statements with respeet to its solvency. The proprietor of the News raised an action tor libel against the Waipawa paper, and a jury gave them £l5O of damages and costs. Then the Editor of the News also raised his action against the Waipawa journal, but the case was settled by the defendants paying _ £IOO, without costs. The actions were tried at Wellington, and the costs given were only on the scale as if the action had been tried in Napier. The winners would therefore have a tolerably long bill of costs to pay outside those carried by the verdict. Next, the Evening News had its turn. Some articles had appeared in that journal attacking Mr Grubb, formerly postmaster at Napier. We have read these articles and mast admit that they were grossly libellous. Mr Grnbb raised bis action against the News claiming £IOOO as damages. The proprietors of the News “ caved in ” and compromised the case by paying the aggrieved Ur Grubb a sum of £2OO, so the case did not go to trial. Now, who benefits from all this litigation ? The proprietors and editor of the Evening News get £250 as damages. Bat oat of that they have a heavy bill of ordinary and extrajudicial costs to pay to their own lawyers, which will probably more than swallow np the sum awarded to them as damages. Then they have to pay Mr Grubb £2OO and also the costs on their own side, so the Evening News comes out of the whole business sorely out of pocket. Mr Grubb is the only person who has gotjauy real satisfaction, as be obtains £2OO and a published apology from the Evening News. But the two journals who fought with each other have come out of the battle all the wone of it. The Waipawa Mail has been hard hit; but the Evening News, though victor, is also out of pocket. These actions for libel icarcely ever give satisfaction to anybody. If a blackguard writes lies and slanders about a decent man, he of coarse ought to be punished, But a civil action for libel claiming damages is a very unsatisfactory way of getting at the offender. A prosecution for criminal libel would answer much better. In " the good old days " unscrupulous men were less ready to slander with tongue and pen, because “ the pistol at twelve paces ” could be resorted to by the victim in order to get redress, and a slanderer, being usually a coward, did not relish the ordeal of the “ duello.” But in these modern times aggrieved folks go to the Supreme Court and claim a £IOOO or so as damages. Sometimes they get money satisfaction, but more often the damages given are nominal, and the aggrieved persona find themselves considerably worse off in pocket after they have been through the Law Courts.