SENSATIONAL LIBEL CASE.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume V, Issue 646, 13 August 1891, Page 2

SENSATIONAL LIBEL CASE.

A LAWYER COMMITTED FOB TBIAL. [SPECIAL TO THE STANDARD.] Auckland, bet night. Groat exoitement has been caused here by a charge of libel preferred in the Police Court to-day by a young lady, against Hugh Shortland, a local solicitor, and son of a gentleman wallknown in connection with the early history of Auckland. The nephew was prominent early in New Zealand. Shortland was married in England some years ago, and gained notoriety through tbs discovery of the drowned body of his wife. He was detained in custody, but subsequently released. To-day he was charged with wickedly and maliciously writing and publishing pertain fplse. scandalous, malicious, and defamatory matters, and things of and concerning the informant, an unmarried girl. Several letters were referred to in the information. In the first to a young man occurs the following words, ' Gall at my office and I will give you proofs of the girl’s (meaning informant’s) charac ter. Unfortunately I seduced this girl, or she eedsced ma,’ and in another part of the same letter the words, ' She has had no qnd of questionable loves, and ill report abroad. You will remember she went to the circus with you ; this is just like her characterbad, you cannot believe a word she says, and she is very ounning ’ and in another part of the same letter, ' She (meaning informal) hai been my mistress—l recmta> mend her to you for pleasure,’ and in ta <)Main part qf another letter is written by the said Hugh Shni’tlwJ fo an unmarried girl (dated 30th July, 1890) the words fojjqWfPsf; 'For certain delicate reasons which she 6a.it bast foil yon, I agreed to matry her at hfl? request,* and in cerfoin paper writing, written by the sajd Hugh Saortland, and published by him, to a married woman, the word? following : ' I have now looked into her (meaning informant’s) conduct since she was 14 years of age, and I find her to have had many common lovers, and to have been thoroughly unprincipled with several men, two cf whom at least are married men,’ and iii ariothar pari oi the said letter writing the words, 1 1 regret that I now find that this young girl means by nature for purity at tfn early age, b 7 the language of her mother, and the liberty she got and the company she kept, lost her viginity io gift to a boy,’ Mr Hugh Campbell appeared for informant ano dsfond&nt conducted his own Case. The evidSaae for the prosecution disolo'sed that seme time in 1839 thh young lady inferntent;became acquainted with tha defendant,

He had been engaged on some business for the young lady’s mother, and that resulted in his become a frequent visitor at her housesome time after that defendant paid attention to tho young lady. Shortly after this acquaintance commenced defendant wrote to informant’s mother, asking her to give to him certain property of hers in the city of Auckland, the consideration of such gift being that he then proposed to marry the daughter, without anything have been previously said by defendant to the daughter. Shortly after, defendant left Auckland, and upnn returning in 1890 the acquaintanceship was renewed. There had been before he went away something almost amounting to a promise of marriage, and whilst he was away letters passed from him to the young lady. In one of these letters he made demand upon infor mant for £2O, and asked her to sell her piano. When defendant did return a Roman Catholic priest was interviewed with regard to the proposed marriage, and the result was that the young lady's mother told defendant that she refused her consent, and said that the marriage should not take place. Thereupon the defendant violently began to inform the mother that if he did not get the girl, that if obstructions were put ia his way he would defame her all over the town, that he would make it impossible for her to live in the town, that he would treat her as he had treated other young ladies, and he told her particularly with regard to a young lady in England. The result of these threats was that Shortland was flogged with a poker. He was then taken by the collar, and put out of tha front gate. However, he appeared to be a persom whom it was impossible to offend, and he appeared at the house again that same evening, or if not then, shortly afterwards. On this occasion the young lady was going out to a circus with another gentleman while defendant was in the house. This appeared to give great u.nbrage to defendant, who repeated his throats that if the girl did not marry him he would defame her character, and make it impossible for her to live in Auckland, and he proceeded to do it. That brought the facts up to about the middle of July, 1890. On tha 12th of that month defendant had written a letter to tho young lady, containing terms of affection, but within 14 days from that time he began a system of defamation, The first letter was to a young unmarried woman, not previously acquainted with defendant. About this time, as showing the malloa of defendant, paragraphs were sent to the “ Observer," which wore identified by th" editor as the handwriting of def -ndant. Attention was referred to these paragraphs by the young lady hersolf, who called and said they were gross scandals. Afterwards th y did not appear, but were atill sent in for some time.

The evidence was of a startling character, and showed letters of the grossest nature sent by Shortland to certain girls of good repute, whom he did not even know, but who were employed in the same place as informant.

The mother of informant deposed that defendant told witness that if he did not have her daughter he would take oare that nobody else should. Defendant said he would scandalise her daughter, and when ho was done with her she should have plenty of sweethearts. Witness asked defendant what he meant by saying that, and he replied he had seduced her, and would cause others to do so Witness took the poker, and ordered defendant out cf her house. She beat defendant as hard ag her hands could do it, and put him out of her gate, and told him not to ooma to her plaoo again. Defendant earns to witness’ house several times afterwards, and ra pealed words about having seduced the girl. Witness asked defendant what ha had done to his wife that caused her death. Witness asked leave to write it Defendant told witness the lady he was engaged to was acquainted with an elderly gentleman, a solicitor in England. Defendant told witness he got acquainted with hat by his uncle transacting this young lady’s father’s business, He knew the lady had a targe fortune, and wanted to get the mon 3 y. He caused her to break off the engagement with this gentleman, and she did so. He had taken her out several times on horseback, A short time after that they were married privately. He did not see her after their marriage until she committed suicide.

Defendant requested that informant be called to give evidence. The request was refused.

Defendant was then committed for trial at tha next Supreme Court criminal sessions. Bail was allowed in two sureties of £25 each, and one of £5O. Ha made a statement to the Bauch, alleging that a conspiracy existed between the informant and the Observer in the oase; that he had never spoken to informant's mother regarding secrets existing between his wife and himself, and that the statements of the said witness in this con. neotion were untrue. He reserved his defence.