Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,1886. The Hutt Slander Case.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XIX, Issue 1883, 13 September 1886, Page 2

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price Id. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,1886. The Hutt Slander Case.

Scandals with reference to the character and eondnct of schoolmasters, unfortunately sometimes come before the public of this colony. It is not so very long ago that the Wairarapa settlers were troubled with such a character, but as the person affected left the district and ceased to be master of a school, the affair was ultimately allowed to fall into oblivion. A case at the Hutt has, however, come fully before the public, »s it only recently formed the subject of a trial in the Supreme Court at Wellington. The main facts of the case may be briefly stated. Mr C. A. Richards is the master of a school at the Lower Hutt. He is a man of about 58 years of age and has been for over twenty years a schoolmaster. Some months ago reports got into oirculation that Mr Richards had been taking improper liberties with some of the young female children attending the school. The affair was taken up by the local school committee, and a public meeting of householders was held with respect to it. AMr Speedy, the father of some of the children attending the school, stated attbe meeting that he had been informed “ that Mr Richards, the teacher, took his daughter up and set her on the form and handled her ; ” also, “ that another girl had been similarly treated.” The Education Board next investigated the matter and passed a resolution exonerating Mr Richards. Mr Richards therefore raised an action against Mr Speedy for slander, claiming £SOO as damages. Mr Richards also raised an action against a Mr Caverhill lor slander, on account of somewhat similar statements made by him. The action against Mr Speedy was tried last week and resulted in a verdict in favor of the defendant, thus making Mr Richards, the plaintiff, liable for all the costs on both sides. Some of the evidence given at the trial was of the most damning character to Mr Richards. The defendant, Mr Speedy, admitted having used the words complained of, but alleged that be honestly believed them to be true. Six little girls were, one alter another, placed in the witness box, Agnes Speedy, eleven years of age, swore positively to grossly improper acts on the part of Richards towards her. Amy Jayne deposed that Richards had acted improperly to a little girl named Emily Judd, Annie Donnelly corroborated Bayne's evidence. Emily Judd herself described the natr of the liberties to which she had been subj. ..led. Ellen Speedy deposed that Richards had acted indecently to her. Bessie Caver* bill stated that Richards behaved improperly both H .herself and Agnes Speedy. To give the full details of l he improper conduct on the part of Richards describee! by nil* these children would simply disgust our readers. On the other side, two of the pupil teachers in the school gave evidence favorable to Mr Richaius, but such testimony did not shake the direct, positive statements of the children. Other evidence was called to the effect that Mr Richards had borne a good character. Mr Richards himself gave evidence to the effect that any liberties he had taken with the children wore of an innocent character. In putting the case to the jury, His Honor, Mr Justice Richmond remarked

There was a great difficulty with respect to charges of this kind, which had been described as " easy to make, hard to prove, harder still to disprove.' 1 The jury would really have to proceed ou their ot i ion of the credibi' fy of the six little girls Jr Tiavus had caiied. After reading the eii fence over His Honor said there was the issue before the jury of truth or not. If they held that the statement in the charges as he had read it was supported by the evidence, they would find for the defendant ; but if on the other hand they thought it had not been made out, they would have to consider what amount of damages they would give the plaintiff. There was no question that a false statement of the kind must be deeply injurious to a man in the position of Mr Rickards. ’’ The jury retired, and in about an hour returned to Court, and asked whether a verdict of three fourths could be taken. His Honor said it could, after the jury had been looked up for three hours, or by consent of the parties. Counsel agreed to accept a verdict of three fourths, and the- jury a few minutes later returned a verdict for the defendant. Judgment was accordingly entered r or the defendant, with costs on the middle scale. Practically, the meaning of this verdict is that the jury believe the evidence given by the sis little girls to the effect that Richards had been guilty of grossly improper conduct to some of them. After carefully considering the evidence, we have come to the conclusion that the veidict of the jury was altogether a right and just one. This schoolmaster, Richards, by raising an action for slander, voluntarily put himselt upon bis own trial, and a jury have, in effect, found him guilty. We should think that after such a verdict the Education Board would not cousidei it desiiable to farther retain Mr dichards in his position as master of a ( school containing many of the young female children of the Hutt settlers.