SECOND EDITION. ALLEGED LIBEL.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 14307, 1 June 1914, Page 7

SECOND EDITION. ALLEGED LIBEL.

CLAIM FOR £2 000 DAMAGES. being heard at supreme COURT. LOCAL PARTIES CONCERNED. Considerable interest is being taken in a libel action Wnich is being heard before Judge Edwards and a special quryai the Supreme Court to-day, V 1Z .> -' claim for JJ2OOO for alleged libel publish- , ed in two letters alleged to have bas.i written by Mrs A. J ; Smythe. Smythe was also joined as a n>to.ma..i. THE JURY. The following special jury heard the case:— Messrs G. March (foreman), J. OGalbally, A. G. Muir; M W. -^ hton > McFarlane, F. J. Johns, P. C. Peters, J. Thor.p, G. N Baggett, A. Nixon. E. Gilbert, and D. Culliname. COUNSEL. Mr G. Hutchison appeared for the plaintiff and Mr T. M. Uilford (Wellington), with him Air G. Armstrong (Wanganui), appeared for the defendants. STATEMENT OF CLAIM. The statement of claim sets out that Vera Paterson, wife of L. D. Paterson, merchant of Wanganui and a pratner m the firm of Gibson and Paterson, proceeds against Andrew John Smythe, settler or Wanganui, and Sybil Mary Smythe, bis wife, on that Mrs Smythe falsely and maliciously wrote and published and caused to be delivered by post to Rev, J. LI. Dove, late Principal at the Wanganui Collegiate School, the following letter;— Palmerston North, „ IGt’n October, 1913. Rev Dove. Dear Sir,—Permit me to bring under your notice a thing which 1 think a disgrace, the way that a married woman, whose husband is in Australia, carries on with your boy at the College. This woman, I believe, lives opposite your College. She invites the boy to her house at all hours; sne has been seen at night after church going home by herself with one of your boys whoms name is Miles . She uses signals in the day time, when she is by herself and the boy go there. She gets permits to yonr church for tb'at purpose. Rev. Dear Sir, this is common talk in this town the way that this woman is going on, I bring this to your notice so as to save a scandlo which is sure to follow if this woman is not stopped from doing so. —I remain, Yours faithfully. (No signature.) P S.—l have it from good authority. I believe if you keep watch on this house you will see for yourself. I don’t know who she is. Also on December 4th the female defendant maliciously published to Mrs Dove, pnd sent to her by post, the following- letter: Wanganui. December 4th.

Mrs Dove. Dead Madam, —Excuse the take in drawing your attention to theßrarryings on, of one of your'hoys at-the College, the name of Miles with a married woman opposite. My husband tells me that be with two other man, whosewKorking on the job close by, on afternoon saw she and Mi’ea missbehaviug their seifs in a most digf raceful manner. Since then they have een watching them and they find that he spends a lot of his time there. He writes on blackboard at the window and she reads it with the glasses from her house, he wrote some thing on it on Tuesday morning he went to town and then she followed and they were seen in town with her alone. Why I write you is that one of these men knows her husband and is going to tell him all about if when he returns, this man says that he has been watching this woman for some time, and has made enquiries about Miles, be thought at first they were related, but that is not so, she has only got to know- him since her husband has been away this last time. This is not the first young man that has got into trouble over this woman, a young man the name of Hatrick had to leave the town throngh her. and that is why she is being watched.' No doubt from what my husband tells me she is a most wicked woman, for there is other things she has done also that may lead her into trouble. Several of the bovs at the College knows and have told there parents, and it is coming the talk of the town I thought lt_ only my duty to let you know after what I had heard. I cannot give von my name as my husband has forbidden me not to.—l remain. Yours faithfully, (No signature.) The claim sets out that the “married woman” and the subsequent references were made against Mrs Paterson, and that they were allegations of disgraceful aim scandalous conduct on the part of Mrs Paterson. She claimed .£IOOO in respect of each publication. STATEMENT OF DEFENCE. The statement of the defence was a general denial of the allegations of the

EXPERIENCED MOTORISTS BUY THE STUpEBAKEH. o/' V ° n t . th ® ! , nan ln tl,e 3tre<> t knows nowadays that i he btndebaker car is manufactured by the largest and comple.est organise: ion devoted to the manufacture of high-grade automobiles in the world. He can ted you that the annual outline of ntudebaker , cars is phenomenally urge and that he Suidebaktr Corporation has a repu at;oa lor being a lit. .e ahead of ad its comp.titors in the matter of utilising the lat.st refinements and improvements in automobile construction and equipment. What the man in the s leet does not know, however, is the fact which is only realised by Stude' aker owners—the fact that, despi'e i.s extremely nio-lcra e price, the Stude. aker is eminently de end able, reliable, and durable. There a.e four hundred owners of Stndebaker cars in the Dominion to-:ay, and each one i.s more than satlsfiei will the sterling houestv of Studelaker workmanshi]-. It is net surprising, therefore, to find exreriincod motorists investing in the Studebaker. For instance, we have just received deliv -. v o. a shipment of the latent 1914 25 h.p. fivoseater Studebaker touring car. Tics car is equipped with the “uagner” two unit electrical se --tarter (the “fool-proof," press-the-button starter that drops out of gear as soon as the engine starts!, anc: fitted with ele. trie lamps, supplied with current by an independent ‘'Wagner” generator driven by the engine. In everv o her item of equipment—hood, windscreen, fco.n, speedometer, and-so for 1 this car is up-to-date to the minute. The general design is on European lines, including full floating rear axle. The ’ rice is J345 here in Wanganui, complete and ready for the road. Full •> rr'iculws at Adams, Ltd., ‘Avenue, agents for Studebaker cars.

plaintiff, that the letters were written by Mrs Smythe. In answer to counsel ot plaintiff’s demand . Mrs Smyt’he’s counsel set out several specific instances ot_ alleged misconduct on the part of -Mis Paterson with Miles. THE PLAINTIFF'S CASE. The evidence of Rev. and " which was taken before they ’eft hM England, was put in, and Mr Hutoln.-o.i quoted passages. Both of those pmon considered tu e inferences m the lcUe>s referred clearly to the plaintiff, -Mis Paterson George Wilfred Harden, manager ot the Bank of New South Wales .at \\ an-o-anui, who had done a good deal im comparing hand-writings, was .first called- Be believed, after examining admitted writ-ino-s of Mrs Smvthe 1 with the a.legecl documents, that the latter were written by Mrs Smythe. ' r■ AUTHORSHIP OF LETTERS ADMITTED. Mr Wilford then admitted that the letters were written by Mrs Smythe. MORE EVIDENCE.

Leonard D. x Paterson, the husband of the plaintiff, said that he had been ma*--ried over tfirce years. They had a little boy about two years of age. They lived in Liverpool Street Extension, opposite the College, and the Smythe’s were their next-door neighbours. Witness was a traveller and was frequently away from home in Australia wn extended trips. Last year he left Wanganui iii Jajiuary and returned in August Hewlett again in September and got backhome a- few days before Christmas. When he left in August, Mrs Paterson’s mother and sister (Mrs and Miss Mo.ulem, of Palmerston) were staying with his wife in their house in Liverpool Street Extension. Soon after his return in December Rev. Dove banded him the anonymous letters.' He fixed the authority on Mrs Smythe,' and his solicitors wrote her to that effect and also demanding full reparation and an apology. The reply was a denial.of having ever written the letters. In March of this year he again left for Australia and it was there that he learned that the defendants had pleaded justification. To Mr Wilford—Witness was positive that he arrived hack at Auckland on December 20th. There was no doubt about this. He was only there an hour and a half before he left by the Main Trunk for Wanganui. He sent a wire to his wife, but got no reply. His wife was not at home when he arrived, she being at Palmerston.

Mr Hutchison stated that this was all the evidence he would call" at this stage, Alr M ilford asked, before ho went on with his plea of justification, whether, as hp held that Air Hutchison had gone further than calling formal evidence of hand-writing, if he could call further evidence.

His Honor said that Mr Hutchison had in no way gone out to meet the plea ofjustification set up by the defendant. Mr Wilford said he pnly brought the m ‘U ter bpfore tl,e f or hjs direction. Mr Milford detailed to the iurv the procedure of the defence and the alterations and amendments to the statement of claim and defence. He quoted many authorities to support his contention that a damaging statement can be communicated to a third person if it is in the public interest and if it is made without . S ! ,ch “ statement or statements were privileged” if no malice whatever whoever or , ' , Published the statement, by the defendant Mr Wilford stated that in ins plea of nistification he did not make any allegations 0 „ which a divert coidd re obtained against the plaintiff.

THE JUSTIFICATION EVIDENCE Mr Wilford first called Mrs SmVthe until recently lived next to Mm 1 atersou, opposite the Collegiate School s: ““t- Mre 1 ° y eai ''’ meeting her at witness’ own house. Mrs Paterson was foi some months, a very frequent visitor at witness house, and they were on very good terms ot fnendship—.o friendly thithvitness helped plaintiff to care for her (pfamtin s) cuifd, looking after it, etc when she went out, 'tne.se terms of friendship remained until recently. At witness' nouse a telephone was installed, but, there wan none at the Paters in's. Mrs i aterson was a frequent user of the phone, but she \vas stopped doing so because she became such a nuisance, ringmg up young men in the town and because witness did not want the Exchange people to think it was; her (witness). Sno stated that ■ she knew an ex-Coilegiate pupil. Miles by name, whom she had often seen at Mrs Paterson's house, sometimes as many as from lour or five times a day. he uiied to go first during the run before breakfast, during the II o’clock recreation, after lunch, after school, and after tea. Mrs Paterson often spoke of him as “Charles.” Witness had only been in the house once when he was there, and on that occasion she left immediately. \\ hen he came in the mornings:, he would stand at the fence and a conversation would be carried on between him and Mrs Paterson, she often leaning out ’of her bedroom window' in “dccolette” dress. She used to make gestures to him while he. was there talking. Witness knew, from hearing it, that there was: a whistle signal between Mrs Paterson and Miles, ana which some of the other boys learnt, and used it to Mrs Paterson, giving the w'histlo given by Miles calling Mrs Paterson Out, would hide or laugh. This whistle was a noticeable one and Mrs Paterson used to whistle it. She had seen Miles visiting the -house while the plaintiff's husband was aw’ay from home. She had also seen her going home from Church with- the boy Miles. She knew that to go to thei School Chapel, permits had to be obtained. This Mrs Paterson told her. On a Monday, the end' of November, about five o’clock in the afternoon, witness was looking out of one of : her window’s when she saw Miles standimr on the Paterson’s back verandah. Mrs Paterson was taking clothes off the line, and she brought these on to the verandah. They embraced and they kissed,' both then rhnniug into the house. She had seen the “skylarking” about the house on occasions. On another occasion she saw’ Mrs Paterson leaning out of her window. Miles being across the road in the School, grounds. The plaintiff had on “the thinnest garment it was possible for any woman to wear.” Once, when Mr Smvthe was out of tow’n, Mrs Paterson invited witness over to her house to

■■”a.vc a good time with the boys.” Mrs Paterson knew Mr Smytho was absent. Early in December last, before the 4th, witness saw Mrs Paterson, with a pair of opera glasses, read messages wVitte:i on hoards in the Collegiate School classroms. Miles was present in The school

room :and had the chalk in his hand. Witness had only seen Mrs Paterson and 'Miles together in Mrs Paterson’s' homo .• and escorting her home from Church. Ihe back verandah at the Paterson’s .could not be seen from‘the College. The luncheon adjournment wa» thpu taken. . THIS AFTERNOON. . nTHE DEFENDANTS’ STORY ‘CRITICISED. ; Whon the Court’ resumed at>'2 o'clock, Mrs Smythe resumed her evidence, coaling with Mrs Paterson’s conduct witli Hatrick. She said she only knew him bv si-hc. V, itioss had seen,;him frequently’ at the Patelsou’s housq. Mrs had often discussed Hatrick with witmas | and she told her, when she was visiting, that “Archie” Hatrick was in the j ' put ring the baby to sleep, and that/ Ds. j i was there.‘ to keep her company. there ‘ was no IFh in uie If.'dioom. mw iaVi-r----sbn told witness! about her going to swim- j ming sports' with - Hatrick. She said j ■ that ,someone had written to .Ba-iidL.s ( fiancee of her going out with him -Mrs Paterson said that the. young lady came back on getting the letter and her annoyance, she forbidding Hatncic to «■* near the house. Mrs ’ .Paterson toM witness that Hatrick was, very-much ten love with her, but that she had,persuaded him to get engaged to the otaer yonng lady. As he was not fond enough ot tlm girl to marry her he was going to Amc-n- --- During the same conversation Mrs Paterson told her that she had gore to the races and that “Archie” Hatrick, had spent fine day with her in preference to his own young lady. ■ - Reverting to the letters, witness ad-; mitfed writing both the anonymous letters. She had attempted to disguise her handwriting. One was posted by , a friend of hers at Palmerston, and the other was posted in Wanganui. Mr Dove did not reply to the first letter so witness wrote, after a lapse of five wcek(s, to Mrs Dove, as she'considered it her duty to do so. Between the writing of the two letters, t’ue “goings on” with Miles had been continuing. She had not coinnram- ‘ cated the contents of ‘the letters with anyone prior to their despatch, with the exception of Mrs Paterson’s sister (Miss MowlemV She had asked her husband if , she haid better go" and see Mr Dove, but her husband forbid her to do so., She had written the letters to Mr .Dove and i his wife with the sole .object of having conduct she did not think proper, between school-boys and a-married woman, put a 'stop to. She had expected that this 'would have been done. ' ' ’ 1 Mr Hutchison cross-examined. Tie frequent uses’ of witness’ telephone by Mrs Paterson, covered a period of; months > before the writing of the first letter. Witness told Mrs Paterson not to use it again, as it was contrary to the telephone regulations and also because she did not ’.. consider it right for a, married .woman to ring up young men-as Mrs had 1 . done. Some of the young, men’s names were:—Hatrick, Curtis, Reed, Morrison, , and others, whose names she was not sure of. She had heard of these .young men ; from Mrs Paterson. The conversation over ■ the ’phone were, in the nature of instructions to come and spend the evening:

Witness said that Miss Paterson, used to call the men by their Christian names when ■ talking over ,the ’phone. She could not detail the conversations as-she did riot take them down., in a note-book at the time. .The two mouths Miles was a most frequent; visitor of Mrs Paterson’s were, September and October. Six or seven times during these two months and after, Mrs Paterson bad appeared at-the window, only sparsely clothed. At Mr Hutchison’s suggestion witness gave a demonstration of the whistle signal between Mrs Paterson and. Miles. It, turned out to be a bar of the One Step tune; “A Policeman’s Holiday.” Mr Hutchison—Do you know what the “The Policeman’s Holiday” is? Mr Wilford—ls that under tho new regulations?

Continuing, witness said that she knew of twolocacsions on which Miles had spoil Mrs Paterson homo, after the writing- of the first letter. He saw her home several times before this.

Mr Hutchison—At wljat window ' you-see this exhibition of X-ray harmeht by Mrs Paterson?—Her bedroom window. Continuing, witness said that this would be before .the first letter was written; Mrs Paterson visited witness once or twice after being- forbid to use, thei telcphone. \\ itness had a very good home and a very good husband, and never informed Mrs Paterson to the contrary, though sue might have complained a little on one occasion as even the best fomily ha,s its jars aiid little disagreeP ltness did llot after complain nLf a ? aterS °n of li« husband’s doni duct. She n e v er told her that she could not keep a-maid on accditnt of : his conduct towards them. She had never complained to Mrs Paterson that had found indecent post cards in, hm I band’s pockets. ■ ■ 1 1,1,8 ' (Left Sitting.) ■ ,