Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL CASE.

AN AUSTRALIAN AUTHORESS IN COURT. HER HUSBAND RECEIVES £5OO DAMAGES. The plaintiff in thia case sued for damages for a libel contained in a letter addressed to hie wife ; and the defendant by his pleadings denied that the words used bore the meaning imputed to them, and alleged privilege. The case was heard by Mr Justice Denman and a special jury in the Queen’s Bench Division on June 6. Mr Lockwood, Q.C., and Mr Atherley Jonea were for the plaintiff, and Mr Kemp, Q.C., Mr Fillan, and Mr James Todd tor the defendant. Mr Lookwood said that Mr CampbellPraed lived in Norfolk-square, Hyde Park, and his wife had devoted her time to literary parenite, had written novels and so on. Mr William Graham, the defendant, was last year about to start what he called a “ Co--mopolitan journal,” named The Gentleman. In September, when this journal was about to appear, the defendant was very anxious to have the liteiary services of Mrs Campbell* Praed; and it was in reference to his requirements in this direction that Mr Campbel!-Praed made his acquaintance. Mrs Campbell-Praed had at that time B good deal of work on hand, and therefore she could not at that time write for that journal ; but its publication was delayed until about the end of October, and she con* ser.ted to write a story for it, to appear from week to week. As she was not in good health, Mr Campbell -Praed went one Sunday to the chambers of Mr Graham in the Albany to discuss his proposal as to Mrs Campbell -Praed writing for his journal. Mr Graham gave, upon the eve of the publication of hie journal, a soiree in the Prince’s Room at the Criterion. Mrs Campbell-Praed was not well enough to go to the soiree, but Mr Campbell-Praed went, and found there was not such a company there as Mr Graham had led him to expect, some of the men of exalted names being missing. It bad happened that when the plaintiff went to the defendant's chambers, he saw two ladies, one of them Miss Morgan, and he was introduced to them, He again saw Miss Morgan at the soiree, and Spoke to her for a few minutes, until Mr Graham came and took the lady away to the supper-room, and Mr Campbell-Praed never saw her again that evening. On the following day Mrs Campbell-Praed received a letter in these terms t E 4, Albany, Piccadilly, Oct, 26, 1888, Dear Mrs Praed—l have much pleasure in sending you the first number of the Gentleman, ana I shall transmit a cheque for your charming contribution on Monday. It is with regret, however, that I must here say that it will bo quite impossible for me to number yon any further among my contributors, your husband’s conduct last night in Mking a young lady under my charge and in * my hearing to dine alone with him was so Unheard of as to render any further relations •ven of a business nature impossible.— Believe me, yours sincerely, Wat. Gbxham. This was the libel sued upon, and there was not a tittle of ground for the statement made in it. Mr Campbell-Praed gave evidence. He said that when Mr Graham interrupted witness's conversation with bliss Morgan and took her away he seemed to be annoyed. Witness noticed this, and that he did it abruptly and rudely. As a man would who was annoyed ’—Or jealous. In answer to further questions, the witness stated that Mrs Campbell-Praed had sued the defendant for breach of contract, Mias Ann Morgan was next called, and denied that Mr Campbell-Praed asked her to dine alone with him. The defendant took her to supper. He suggested that Mr Camp, bell-Praed had asked her to dine with him, and she denied it, He made out that he was lure of it, Cross-examined : He said that he heard Mr Campbell-Praed say it. Witness declared that it was not so, and that it was an untruth. This constituted the case for the plaintiff. Mr William Graham, the defendant, was at once called, and he was asked : Did you believe that you heard the plaintiff asfe Mies Morgan to dine with him alone ?—I do. Mr Justice Denman : You do know ?—Yes; I am positive of it. Mr Kemp: Did that lady tell you that there was no truth in your accusation f —No, •he did not. I put the question, and the lady refused to answer. Did you in yourjetter intend to impute immorality to the plaintiff’—Not in the least. I only intended to impute a breach of etiquette, as I stated in a letter. Cross-examined: He simply intended to impute a gross breach of etiquette; in the same way as he should consider it a breach of etiquette if a man should use his knife instead of his fork at witness’s dinner table. The two two things stand in the same posilion ?—Precisely so. Would you decline to continue to employ a ady upon your journa jf husband ate ; thhl ‘ k I nile --No. (Laughter.) Hit L the case of getting a novel he should not have -uat,letter. But he foresaw that he ’s*'* *«A M thrOWu •flrtwmdweutJj- into hoar hue--nd's society. Mr Justice Denman directed the jury to consider first whether that letter was a libel, and, if so, to say to what damages the plaintiff was entitled. The jury, without leaving the box, gave a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £5OO, and his lordship gave judgment in accordance with the finding. Mr Kemp asked for a stay of execution. Mr Justice Denman, however, thought th at he ooght not to interfere.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GSCCG18890810.2.20

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 336, 10 August 1889, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
948

EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL CASE. Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 336, 10 August 1889, Page 4

EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL CASE. Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 336, 10 August 1889, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert