THE LIBEL CASE.

Manawatu Times, Volume V, Issue 142, 21 May 1881, Page 2

THE LIBEL CASE.

The charges of Criminal Libel, brought against Mr. John B. Dungan by Mr. Alexander M'MinD, was beard at Palmerston on Tuesday, before R. Ward, Esq., R.M. M-\ Hawkins appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Staite for the defendant, There were two charges of libel brovjht against the defendant, but only one w - heard on Tuesday. | The libellous matter complained of was, contained m an article beaded "The Moth and the Candle," published m the Manawatu Times. The following was information : — That he, the said J. B. Dungan, of Palmer>ton North, journalist, did contrive and unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously m? tend to injure, vilify, and prejudice the said Alexander M'Minn and to deprive him of his good name, fame, credit, and reputation, and to bring him into public contempt, scandal, iofamy, and disgrace, on the 20th day of April, 1881, and maliciously did write and publish and cause and procure to be written and published a false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel m the Mmiawatu Times newspaper, printed and published by the said John Boulger Dungan, containing divers fa'ae, scandalous, malicious, and J defamatory matters and things concerning the said Alexander M'Minn according to the tenor and efiect of the following that is to , y, 'The Moth m the Candle ' well knowing the same to be false being an indictable offence." The following is the article complained of: — There are certain spscimens of humanity — they can scarcely be called men — whose instincts are so base and grovelling, that they deliarht m wallowing m low notoriety, and periodically court the dragging of their names through the mire. Of this class the " Journalist of Repute" stands m the fore* most rank. With a private history as familiar to the resident^ of the West Coast as tou6eho'd words, he H?, of all others has had the audaciiy o enterthe private circle, and defame the fair fame of respectable ladies He, He, of all otheis, seeks to refer to the faults and failings of his fellowmen, and indulge m proh jpicdor exclamations ! In a former issue we threatened to give the public the character of him who sets himself up as a ' nsor, and were it not tha* we do not wish to wring the heart of the lHy who is tied to tuch a contemptible being, we Bhould mavshall the ghost of Morali'y befo;e him, recount some of his ante-nuptial manliness ; and contrast his present assumed immaculateness with his former dasta>dly cowardice. How one who knew that his soul was stained with a blot of infamy such as at one ti no merited the contempt of all honorable men ; how one who knew that thrt infamy had been paraded through the columns of a paper, recalling to the minds of some the scandal almost forgot'en, and acting as a nine days' wonder upon those who heard it for the first time ; how he, we say, well-knowing that we, m common with every one od this Coast, knew his past history, could court acother expo»£, is beyond all comprehension, unless it is that he got tir«»d of vegetating m the mud, and wished once again to be dragged through his native element. He must certainly reason by contrast, and imagine that we are as magnanimous and chivalrous ss he is treacherous and decidtfal, or he certainly should not Lave thm pursued a course which to endure would strain human generosity to the utmost. He knows full well — as do hundreds of others m the district— that if wehiiberto had fol« lowed his contemptible example, and torn the screen from his family circle, we would have caused him to writhe again that is, if one so wholly lost to all manly and honorable instincts could be actuated by a single feeling which sways ordinary humanity. We have steadfastly refrained from doing so ; we knew every tittle of his past(career, still we never once alluded to his former conduct ; nay more, when his able biographer, Mr, Hkniiy Anderson, placed him on the roasting spit, and turned him round for the edification of the public, we acted on the principle " He that is without sin, &c," gave him our sympathy and support, and strove to stave off some of the kicks and caffs which were hurl d at him. A letter appeared m our last issue scarifying him and his beastly productions as " Squib,'' and with his characteristic meanness of soul, he attributed the production to us, It is an old saying that some people measure other's corn by their o-vn bushels," and the concoction of letters forming such a very large portion of his o-vn literary labors, it is Jittle wonder he should have jumped to such a conclusion. We can now assure him we neither wrote a line nor inspired an idea contained therein. It was he spontaneous verdict of one who at his advent gave him a hearty welcome, nay substantial rapport •—only to find that he had encouraged an unprincipled slanderer, whose only ambition was to pander to vitiated tastes by the invention of prurient and indecent paragraphs, endeavoring to blast the characters of wives and daughters, and Sparing- none m his cowardly attacks under an anonymity. Desperate cases require desperate remedies, and were it not for his persistent, setting at defiance all journalistic etiquette, and his contemptible resort to personalties we should not have broken through our hitherto-observed rule, and dealt with him merely m his editorial capacity. We deeply wgret that we cannot apply the lash to his worthless back without inflicting pain upon the innocent. Were it not for that reason, we would have drawn such a pen and ink photograph of him and his past career, as would make even him despise himself and seek to hide his shame m future obscurity. He boasted of his circulation Feilding, but we are U'ippy to say, for the honor of that town, that it is mythical, for if it were otherwise we would blush for it. That copies are bought there, there is no doubt, hut thpy are purchased by the same cl iss and for the same pur pose that persons buy the fUihr productions of J G. S, Grant — to gratify a fi thy prurient taste, and devour dirty scandal, concocted at the expense o.f truth and the f*ir fame of d''f -nceless fi-male^. Take away the produ tjo. | f ihe bea*l) <• Squib, and the sheet becotn s a couple of columns of badly printed, stale, extracted, matter, sans locals, &ans reports sam a grain of originality, worth perusal or fit to put into the hands of a female. We have given this Malay running a muck a friendly warning j if this be -not sufficient curb, he will have to thank himself if he sees his — — «r— experiences m print. la conclusion we shqld advise this lit-rary moth to be warned m time. He has fluttered round the flange until he has been slightly singed i he *houid retreat before it is too late, or he stands a very good chance of heing ere* mated. In opening the case, Mr. Hawkins said ; his client came there to obtain rtdress for a most atrocious libel on his private character The libel as read by the Clerk m the information spoke for itself, and no oae could doubt the artiole was libellous from beginning to end. He then pro-, ceeded to describe at length the libel and the law of libel as it bore on the Case, In the present article the plaintiff waj nqt me.tttiQn,ed by name, but W&S d.e-

scribed as " the Journalist of Repute," and the law laid it down that where a person was hinted at m such a way as to makt it cJear no other person was intended it was just the same as though the name were mentioned. It must be proved for the defence that the libel was not only true, but for the public good. A. ,er the libel cases had been heard, his client intended to claim sureties of the peace. He would show that up to a certain date the parties m these actions were on friendly tevms. He would produce a paragraph from defendant's paper, speaking m highly complimentary terms of plaintiff, but so soon as plaintiff, plaintiff started, or was about to start, a daily paper m Palmerston, an article appeared attcking him, and even alter the informations were laid he issued an " Extra," stating he regre'ted nothing he had written. Then he followed with a strong article m his paper on the cases, which clearly showed his animus against plaintiff. The prosecution would establish by evidence the inuendoes contained in' the article. Before proceeding to call plaintiff, Mr. Hawkins asked that all witnesses might be o-dered out of Court, as was usual m indictable cases. j Mr. Staite strongly protested against any such application. The facts m connection with the c se were not questioned. It was simply whether it was libel or no libel. This was a great public case. The parties were public men. Representatives of the Press of the district were present 'o report the proceedings, and i those gentlemen would be witnesses for defendant. If they were ordered out of Court the proceedings would not be reported. Mr. Hawkins said of course bis client was desirous of securing the fullest pub- ! licity of the reports, as his character had been assailed, but at the same time he would press his application. His Worship — My ruling has been asked. I rule that witnesses be not ordeied to leave the Court. Mr. Hawkins then called the plaintiff, Alexander M'Minn, journalist, proprietor of the Manawatu Standard, who deposed — I see the copy produced of the Manowaiu Ti.nes, of April 20 ; there iB an article headed " The Moth and the Candle," of which I complain, more particularly of those parts mentioned m the information. Mr. Staite objected to plaintiff being allowed to have the paper m his hand, which had portions underlined by his counsel. It was like reading evidence. His Worship thought it was a pity, but as the paper had been put into Court it couW not now be stopped. Mr. Hawkins (to witness) — What are you termed m that article ? How do you know you are referred to ? By the tenor ; by the allusions. What allusions ? What is the person called to whom it refers ? I The Journalist of Repute. Is that one reason why you identify yourself with it ? Yes. Any other particular reason ? I don't know of any other particular reason. When did you establish the Manawatu, Standard? \ On the 29th of November of last year. Had you any communication with defendant prior te that ? Yes ; about three weeks previously I received the letter produced from him :— DEAR Fib, — Had you elected to start m a fair, honorable manner, the same as the Guardian or the Herald, I would have received your adrent m the same spirit of equanimity as I did theirs; instead of which you borrowed my pass for a few days, with a promise to send me some n«iws, and you kept it for five weeks, to work your own contemptible ends, and then sent your emissary to do a second sneak m the grass. Now I simply defy yon. Mind you, I am not writing this beoause of your intention to start, but because of your snake-like conduct. 1 hare been warned by every one, and told that the persons who fought for you and tried to do you good you woqld be firßt to snap at, and you have been true to the last. Now I tell you whether your canvass is sue jssful or not, whether you start or not, I wiU always have the Qne opinion of you — you have only been deterred from carrying out your intentions from cowardice. J. B, Dukgan. Did defendant write a complimentary notice of you. Yes, he wrote a very flattering paragraph when I left the Feilding Guardian. [read]. Does the article m the Manawatu Times of November 6th, entitled '< A Literary Ishmaelite " refer to you. I believe the term alludes to me. I know so because of having at the time, and still having, a man named Lyes, working for me who is referred to m the article, [read]. Were you ever employed on. the Wan-* ganui papers. Yes, [ have been engaged on both the Herald and the Chronicle. Did you, as stated m the article, borrow a pass from, the defendant ? Yes, I did. What other papers have you been engaged on. . I have been connected with the Mar ton and Feilding papers. To what do you attribute the defen* dant's attack upon you. To the fact of having started a paper here. Is there anything m the paper before you reflecting on you. Yes, there is a sub-leader " Our Truthful Contemporary " which alludes to me. It contains a challenge for £5. [read]. Is there anything m the iasue of Jan. 19, m which you are referred to. Yes, there is a letter headed " A Pro* ftssional Blower," and signed "Man* Chester." Is that calculated to injure the circulation of your paper ? — Mr, Staite— l abject to the question, Mr. Hawkjos — Upon what ground, pray ? Mr, Staite— lt ia irrelevant. We are not charged with libelling the Standard. It is with libelling the proprietor. His Worship— l thiuk the question should not be put. Is there anything m the Times, mf January 36, whioh. alludes to you Yes, there is an article headed " Un- [ blushing Impudence" which alludes to my paper. lam written, of m. three or four places as " The Journalist of Repute." Does it charge you with anything. It charges me with trying to get tie County advertising m an underhand way. It refers to falsehood, treachery, scurrility, clipping adYertissnje.nts mautkox-

ised : it refers to the paper as a fraud to the subscribers ; and says; " The paper {Standard) is emblematical of its proprietor — a fraud." .: What other papers refer to you. ! There is also a paragraph m the paper headed, « The Pot calling the Kettle Black"; I also produce a Manawatu Times dated January 29 ; it contains two paragraphs, ene head, "One tor his Nob ;" the other, " Tom Pepper turned Joe Miller:" [Paragraphs read]. I also produce a Manawatu Times dated February 2 ; it contains two paragraphs, one r headed " A Professional Blower;" I am there referred to as the Ishmael of the Standard; Lyes is also referred to ; the paragraph winds up, " blackguards both,'^ I referring to him and me ; the other* paragraph is headed, "An Original Jornalkt;" I understand J of R. m that paragraph to mean, Journalist of Repute f I also produce a Manawatu Times dated Fe ruary 5 : it contains six allusions to me and my paper ; there is a genera) ' heading to them, " Standardiana ;" they contain references to the Journalist of Repute, also George S. Lockie, who was then m my employ. ; Mr Hawkins— Do you gee the word "Empress" there? Yes. Does that refer to any of your family ? What does it mean P I don't know what it means. r His Worship — Take that down. Examination continued— l swore my information on Saturday week, 7th. May, the Manawatu limes has had several' references to the libel action since then. His Worship said he doubted whether this evidence could be received, being after the information. Mr Hawkins explained that he put m the evidence, not as proving 1 libel, but as proving malice. Mr Staite made.no objection, and toe evidence was received. Examination continued— There if a reference to the present charge m an article headed, "A legal Thunderbolt," and published m the Manawatu Times of May II; the articles alludes te me throughout ; I received the Manawmtu Times " Extra " produced the same afternoon as I laid the charges ; there are allusions to these libels m it, aad a statement that ■' We do not regret on* line we have written, and m effectually silencing the slanderous ' Squib ' we reel we have earned the heartiest gratitude of the people of Palmerston and Peilding." Cross-examined by Mr. Staite. How do you know that you are " The Journalist of Repute." Because the Advocate once called me that, and the context points to me as such. As a matter of fact, have you ever involved your employers m actions for libel. Yes, my employers have been s» involved. Can you name them. Messrs. Eirkbride of the Advocate, and Carson, of the Chronicle, were so involved. Was Mr. Ballance involved m a libel action through you. Not that I know of, nor ever heard. Was he not involved m an action for libel with Judge Rogan. He had to apologise, owing ta tome strictures on Judge Rogsw, . ' Who wrote them, I did as correspondent to the Wanganui Herald, with Mr. Ballance's sanction. Will you swear that, sir. At least tney were sent to him and I suppose he saw them. Answer my question, sir. Will you swear that the libel had Mr. Ballance's sanction. No; I withdraw that statement about the sanctum. . | How long did you remain with Mr. Balance after that. Oh, a long time. . . What amount did that affair cost Mr. Ballance. Mr. Hawkins objected to the . question. Mr. Staite said his contention was that a man who brought ah action for libel must have clean hands. A cheat ceuld not prosecute a cheat, nor could a libeller' prosecute a libeller, snd he would show the plaintiff m this case was a persistent libeller of others. His Worship— l consider it my duty to receive all the evidence offered. What amount did the transaction cost Mr. Ballance, I don't think it coat him any money. , Was, there a writ served. [ don't think so. Now, sjr^ ha,d not M;r. BaUajoqe. to. pay costs. I don't think so* . T Is it not- customary when action* for libels are brought and withdrawn at the; request of the offending party, far that party to pay costs. I cannot say what ia the custom. As a journalist, sir, do. you not know that such is the case. I believe it is. Then ar« you prepared ta swear that Mr. Ballance was not put to considerable expense through your strictures. I won't swear. Were the costs heavy. They generally are. Had Mr. Carson to pay money for your libels written m his paper. The money was subscribed. Did Mr. Kirkbnde lose heavily through a libel m which you involved him. He said he did. Do you not know such to be the case. I can't say. In what capacity were you engaged for the Herald. I was tra.Ye.Hing correspondent along the Coas^ I remember something slightly about a man named Lawrence,, but never wrote a line about his being drowned. What, sir ; although you were ojorres* pondont. I don't remember it. Will you swear that you have never beard of a subscription being got up {or the family of Lawrence. Most decidedly. I have no. recollection of the matter. It is perfectly new ground to me. Will you swear that yov did not write about the funds collected, Most decidedly, ■, .■-• ! Will you swear that you never wrote about the Rev. Mr. Duncan and Mr. Gray m connection therewith. h; I will swear that I never heard: about theKev. Mr. Duncan being connected with the moneys collected for Lawrence; Now. Sir, will you, on your oath, swear that y~u never wrote libel lously of the Rev Mr. Duncan and Mr. AJe.&a.n.der Qray regarding the matter*

No; I will not. Are you addicted to strong writing. It is a matter of opinion. . . Are you, sir; answer my question. Are you or are you not. «-, I don't think Fam. # When you were about to start flMper m Palmerston, were you not advised J;o refrain from your usual strong writing; l , I was advised not to reliate when attacked. By whomP By my friends; those who induced me to star t r catrtteaed me: " -.-•■- " "™" '"-"-'■ -•■■ -" Did you write strongly m the Standard. .._._ I retaliated when pr0v0ked. ..... . . ,. You were married some time ago at Turakina ? j ;[ ; .■.,;:;:, . \ „\ v Did yepr wife reside at Turakina before you married her ? ~ , , ! „ -Yeg;^" . ; "■ ■ ■ -■- ' -;. : ; Nowi; Mr. M'Minn I am 'going to put an unpleasant question to you, but m the. j ihtereits'of my ciient I mast do it. Was j there any criminal intercourse 'between your -wife and yourself before you married her? L ~ j 1 . Aidiscussidif ensued alto whether this question could-bt-put. i ■■ His Worship ruled that the question was a legitimate one, and could- be put. ' .) The question wasrepeated, and the defendant said— l^declineto answer. ' - Counsel — Wellj under the circumstances, I won't press it. ; Was there a day appointed for yenr marriage. > KTfcreVvwai. '.1 .Li ■'' "■■'?. ■;■ . Were you present at the appointed time and ; place. , ;V i •••" ; - ,■ ,■ •'•■<■■,,;■ ,$' \ \ I was not. ' ' '„!•■ Wai there a wedding feast prepared for your wedding at a hotel m Turakina. „ idotftknoWJ^.. .-.,.,: »;■ r 4;., ;."- : Did ypujlea>e Turakiua: the night before your appbi^d weddmg^ay. : A few nightsbefore ; four br five I fcelieve. -~— • [The Court here - adjourned for one hour. Upon resuming, the ' " ' Crost'Exaiixliialtion Continued. By Mr Staitel— Did you inform your intended wife; that you . were leaving Turakina. '•■<-■ • i^'- ■■'■'-'■ ''- • . ' '■■ . Idiinot.- .v; . 7 r \ A \\ jDid you sell your horses prior to lesJr- '■■'■"- Some 'bf taeraV i -..- How many did you keep. j Tw» or three. | , Where did. you go when yomleft Tura.. fcina. x I west r WeUiogtsffl, .\ Were- you expected te be present* the wedding feast. >J Jrßupposei«B, ; !ho>: ;i- ■:■-■ •=■•/! ;' . You did not intimate that you would be absent, ; /N0.<1." :::••■:' ;;.-:« ■■: i I believe you married your then intended afterwards at Turakina. No, I married her at Wairarapa* Ho w long afterwards. ■''■„': A couple of years. ' ~" '■■ Where were you doriag the i»terral» ■•' I was m Auckland, JTelsoß, and •ther places/ ;:; 'i-^.; i.-: : -'A /.'/';;': ;;".\ Were you, summoned for the cost of the wedding feast. ' t • f . No, I never received a Simmons for ■that il#!>wl •" ' '"" "' ■. ' " Were you pot arrested on warrant Yes, I was arrested at Wanganui,! but although \t was for de»t, I never knew what it Was for. , . Was it not the father bf the girl iwho had you arrested. v ; ' ,:•■ It wast.; ;■.<■■■.;. • • ■ ; And do_ yeu mean to tell the Court; that yb» de> nsi know what you were" summorieWfdr, n ■: • V ;! 5 ' I I have heard that the summons: was j for money! lenl and for the wedding breakfast., . „..,.,,..■ i * Hayeyon any reaaon t« doabt the truth ofthatstatemenV ' I suppose not. v < r > -<'. -■ - You wers lodged m Wanganui Gaol. Yesy as a ! debtor,' ' ; How long were you m gaol under that ' warrant. - •-— ■ i _ Oh, about a fortnight or three weeks. ; Do you-know-a journah'ai named Henry Anderson. , „.,. Tei, IknbwhW ' i -I) > Diduhe visit you while you were m prison. j I can't say ; Ihad a ; number ot Iviiitors. v.ii-- --o ■ ■' : ' , „ Will you swear he i did not; :: , ! .No I wonlt swear that. . ... ! ■ Willy«» ewtar thit ht did not visit you at the instance of a Mrs. Blair, ; and endeavor ; ',' .to induce you to marry : the .girl:.;.;,;. ;' ..' .' , ;, ;/.',.;, ...,?.". '.- |if X I cannot say ; I ean't;remember. ! Will you swear, sir, that he did not. . No, I. will; not. • •-,-'.;) | -.d: " Wilt you swear that you did not, with an aath, refuse ttunarry the girk I may have done so. I won't swear I did ndf... .' "\ _.■:'■', ■ - ■['.. What was your reason for not, marry-I-w^'s! disappointed m money I was expecting from home. ; Whsft did you get that money, i — -'• About three weeks afterwards. ' When you got the money did ypm then marry the girl A ' No^ldidinot^ ;; When did you. : ;;.:•. About two years afterwards,. I did write that article' im. the FlsildiHg Guardian :,_l don't remember Mr. Capper being annoyed a> it.. Can yop Account for ihie change of your opinions ?— Change of circumstances. What circumstances ?—A variety. But raeation them—one op two. Mr. Hawkins objected to the question, v Mr. Staite said he was Willing to leave the bare fact ; .;; ; v , ';>.i-' Examination continued-^On April 16 1 published an article headed "Cause and Effect." referring to the defendant i that article was written previous t» the libel I eoinplainof. „ •= : Have you sesn libellous attacks m your paper written by " Squib," attacking Mr. Gobdbehere, of Feilding ? >..— « Squib " wrote several playful article on Mr. Goodbeherei :'- ' ; -'i':V:y ■■ '. ■..■,;.. ! _j-__ Mr. Hawkins objected to this line of examination. ;,.:•■ |- F C > Mi-. Staiiesaidhe was going to | show that plaintiff had - permitted " Squib "to : write slaudera of a of respectable p.irsons, and' that as Mr Dungaii bid by his severe writing silenced " Squibj" his actionfhadbeenlofithepkblicgood.i " His. worihip ruled i the evidence war not admissible.-- i . E.xaminat(ipn continued— Mr. Dungan advised nic to starta .^paper at -Pulls • I did not contemplate starting bae at Feilding; I do not remember his saying to me, "EQft't let your YittiwtiTSWw get tkc

better of your discretion;" he did not over inform me of the amount of business) he wae doing^thave|had lawsuite with Messrs Kirkbride and Capper on leaving Aeir employ ; m 0 £if kbride for commitsion and Capper for salary : " Sqnib has written several contributions daring the last few weeks, but I have not published them, as I thought i; better not to do So |, I have about the same mklice to. .wards Mr Dungan as he has towards me ; I was collector for Mr MKenzie some years ago ? I think I gave him satisfaction.-; we had a Hisagreement-aod- 1^ was advertised out of -hi«_employ , after that I was acting iii'agent for the' sale of beer."""" "" ' ' ' "■'"_" ■^■■- '----—' -Were there not Court eases over, that beer P were not the labels on the beer spurious ? -lidont know ; nipt that I know of. I never saw an article m tbt \^anganui Chronicle condemning me for mv action regarding my marrige; my wife visited me inWanganui Gaal Were you ever engaged •m selling unbranded horses —No. Did you ever take uribrahded horses to — No. ' . '■■„ i i^i, ; ; I dnn't remember the Wanganui Chronicle being- saddled with a libel on my behalf ' I never heard of a young fellow, named Fox, telling his father that I induced him to i catch ■nbr>nded w horses. ,- . Mr Hawkins.— rl suppose we. shall bet charged with horse-stealing directly (Laughter.) ; r ■o ; Bis, Worship-Typu should not jump at^F conclusions, Mrl Hawkins. (Renewed . Laughter) ,:._. ... : .;, ,.;. ■.•';. l v>. „..,,, \ ■ Examination cCpniinued— l do not object to any particular' part of the article headed " The Moth and the Candle- j I believe the words^Were it,not,-that we do not wish •to .wring :'the heart of the lady," refer to thti affair of my not heing present to be married at the time appointed; I can't toy that any indictableoffeuce is attributed ;to me m this article j the word "experiences " with a blank before it- saggesfs it :the 7 word [f .ctimes " m the information .wvs, rniptt.auggested by .me ritwMj)ut their hy , my counsel ; I .believe a much stronger word was sa/eant ;j iwe were on i friendly terms prtviou^ to my starting a papeir ; I ile not know how I acquired the title of Journalist of Repute ; Imay haveiwritten/; of, myself as Mr. ■k. M^Minn, a Jqurnalist of Repute K when I joined. fhe^iio^Mw;' if was "not' m the ' Advocate, %nt pel Maps m the QunrHian. Re-exaisiinea by Mi- Hawkins Defendant has no interest *n any of ..the papert lam said to have; written -libel m ; the; Warkganu} Herald Mel mi Judge Rogan . was fifteen years ago ; I remained m Mr. Ballanbe's employi a leng^time Tlfter he apologised to Judge Rogan ; the letter headed * Our City Fathers," refers' to Mr Dungan, who is a member of the Borough Covncil, and, as s>oh a public man. Are you aware why you should not have an apiaiou of this West Coast; RaiU way?— „V: - - .::-; ■ Mr Staite— Twoopinioat't : (tauglH ter.) :;.OTT' : ill zky-nrv '■•-. A Plaisitiff-I dent see why I should not. When Mr Dungaa got off the train re» turning from Wellington he seemed to be m M the horrors.'-' I did not promise Mr. Dungan I would not start a paper at PaU nerston j since it was known I was going; . toistart a paper at Palnaierstbn» defendant has persecuted nie* -..,"" Constable Gillbspie deposed to serving; susivonses o* defendant^last Tuesday morning, the 10th instant, the day beforean article headed; "A Hegal Thunderbolt" was published ia - the Manawatu Times, '.■"■■" ••■'■ ; •• - fiy Mr Staite— l have- noticed that the twe. papers have bees goings at one ano« ther lately ; I think they axe about *pair one is as bad as the other. ,: ■< By Mr. Hawkins-rl b> notknowhow many articles. the different paperi have had one against the other ; m ftict jf have? taken very littfe ißt«rt»t m Jhe affiiir, I .. simply ha v.e had a gentral opinion thatt they have been going' at each other. ; This cenduded the case for the proses, cution. ■,; , : _ Mr. Staite, for the defence, made an able addre^ He saM the grpunda pjf t4e do* fence were various. His' 'strongest* *rga^ xnent m favor of k dismissal of ."thi iofor* matiion^ wWc)^^:^«dr fojr,- .was upon a leeal point, ti«. v U wa» laid aoiyntoi Fish* ejr*B Dif eirb that a paiCy enlarging another ijrittv Qrituinal .libel mnatcomp into Corrt. with clian 1 hands. iHe^Tiinst b« able to show 1 , the; Coort that he h.ad acted m a spirit of (oir^earance, that he b"*d hot himself 1 been guilty of libel,' bat especially towards tbe person whom hechaiged with, libelling him. Now, what were the facts of this case? They ' Bad it m evidenc* from the* {informant hin>Belf thjatnpjfe qnly was heft systematic, libeller, haVing involved the Wanffanui Chronicle, Wanganui Herald, andßangitikeiAdTOcateall^libeJactions^ or what was equal to that, hitfc thjat '>c had grossly libelle4-Mr v Dungan also, prior to. the article which! was The basis <tf thi& information. -He submitted that fro^o, all the mrtiole« read m, Court tkat day, na single one could, be picted bnt which codtain«d more libel than that .wMttenfey Mr« M'Minn npon Mr. Dungau v aud entitled. "Suffering »> Eecwery:" ;j?hat aiticlewaa--writt«n.two months^ before the one upon which; Mr. M'Mion based his information. And " why did Mr/- M^Miniv i Attack Mr. Dangan m this Banner?. Simply becsn^ev that very morninsr^Bon. which r the jarticl»r, ' app^a^dvMriDunfiaja haji^^^shpifntheUttel^sk . inconsistency of Mr, M'Minn jeßaraing an, 3 important public wc«rkr-th« West Coast, railway. Was the Manawatu, Times to be. blamed for opeaing up such a subject f Ir? journalists were' not to b« permitted to ex-pose-such changes of opiriioH, -which M:-. M'Minn had, that day admitted were the. reßuJt of V change ;bf ";c|roams|anoes,'' what were they supported J bj tie' public f or f Why should' thu'man, who. was persistently libellinß others, be allowed to come into. : Court and put his client to: tha expense, trouble an.d annoyance: of; defending an, information iwoifn by a systematic libeller.. It vca* his (Mr. Btaite» ppiaion, . that m. view 6$ M'Mjnj^s well-known J ' character as a libellous, writer he shpuld»ot have been aUo^e^ejcen "tb.s^ear an information, onachirgi^lijiel.. 1 , TSeii' agiih. both the, parties tdth^aciidn,teing journalists aud public men', were allowed a greater latitude. (m tiieir writings thait, the generakl public. Would the Oourtv m. (Xiew of the general circunist'tiices oi ihe icassj,. nn.t the defendant to the expense and kjo^nvsnieuce of sx . committal for trial \ | Wonjdjt not be an act of charity toUplaintifE, -to/aismiss the informa'ion, and, thus save hifl>'ao. ea%?otff: before the Wanganui public sach, as was made that dayin Palmeiston. He (Mr», Sfaite>' had that day bien compelled to, cross-examine plaintiff iaa strain and upon, ' \ a numbet oif Bubjec^ he much 'regretted ; ; nexertUelesa, as an . act pt : justice to hist client he had been compelled to do so, and, defendant h^d don_;edAt t by h^s action. Ha : Viepea+2d that it wottld^^ WXn act of charity on the part of "-the -Court to, dismiss the in* formation, and thus save p'aintff aoofer.- --• expose of his past life. Le believed tu*t. i«M it HWft (tat \% nm YiittUßL

the|x>werof the Court to. dismiss the information on. either the fa>ta;qrithe lair. He thought that on both grounds the Court ahoold dismiss the information. The information charged his client with 'Jfc&eZy •tating certain things, well -knowing them to ;ba ialapj but :out of plaidtifls .awn mouth he bad that day proved cv ry inference that could' Mfafrly drawn from the article, complained/*. He had pi oyecUhat plaintiff /d^ived 4 ceVtain female* whom he afterwards married ; he had proved th it the word! i?s cowardice" aria "contfmptiWe M were not too strong for the actions he admitted ; and his fathen-in-Hw would not hare followed him over .the colony and ■uccesded m having him arrested unless he had a strong case «gftinrt ; h?«i ; whilst plaintiff's statement that he nover received s summons tot the "amount 'for' which he was incarcerated nauetbtv received with doub^'-'air 1 tifr Cdart" would '^'ave dared *tp r gw^uWfemedtMgaiWiit him uiiless' «ervic? r ofJ!the;junVraosß had been p oved ; whilst the title, "Journalist of Repute," of which plaintiff !complainedl so sfcrohglv, had been proved to sbeiaicpmpliment he hatf originally* given himself m the Peilding Guardian. #Cpns^derjngi the. rTeput-.tlon . M*Mlriri had acquired' as a libellous- writsr, m having" iuvolTed,-Meißrß\ mrkbridß,^Osjsoh, r :and Balla6ceQ£vfiaQeVcti>ift and\eiTvf 'expenses, was it any wonder .that when he deter. nined on'Jsfortlng 'm 'Palmerston his friends Bhouidadviee- him not to write fr, ijOonsWeringj -also, that Mr. had tent, ( him bis railway passj had a/i vised him.andcounetjlled. him; as tf where; he ahpu'd start a : papery was ? •^t, not likely ; that . Mr. Dangan would 'aggrieved .'at . his .action m coming ~ down liks '. ait ' Asgrriao, ._ and claiming that hi* journal. w.*w r the leading Tone of the'Si'-trict, raying with this return the landttat had done him kindness. He also asked f or, adiemissal of the information on the ground that the alleged libel was for the publfcfgopd. It bad resulted m " shuttrng'up^ 1 the slanderoM 'f.Squib,' from whole ! 'coarse no ona was. safe, i CotoplainaHt had admitted, that day that . fori- several ;<weeic* he Inad withheldV " Squib's" writings, thinking it jiidioiitis to dp. so. The chnaacter of " Squib*s "' writings, was notorious, throughout thei.dictricT^Sntd tie "held tha't r m silencing his danderoDS (attafetr Mr Duiigan ba^ acted for .Jthe, public goqdt V: Wfth reference' 'to' tbecharge, he would say.that so .ar fr»m the alle^edlibelVbeingiaisei and published by d> fendant 1 weilaknowing them to be falsMhey had that day; been proved to be true from cempUunantfs own njjuth ; f>s to the malice ineged/ plaintiff bad admitted having preciiely l the same amoOht toward* the; deffndiofea» Jtiie lat" i was charged wit^.; whilst tib.e ; if act that ; plaintiff ; came into Court, with unclean hands, wa3 sufficientof Stself ttf cause a dismwiar bt the charge. In concluttcrrrhe informed the. Cjggg that he was prepared to call a number of witnesc^s for the defence, but would before domg^sp ask' his Wojrsiiip whether he considered 'a^primi/atfi* case bad been Hia^WOTihig said , he, would of course be quite 'witting '.-$o hear any evidenceMMr State-had-tp offeri bpt at'the same time he thought it well to say he 7 felt it his duty ♦o comjnjt defendint for; trial. "HeW there ministariaUy, and it; was for the juVr to say whether or not defendant was jastified, m, ( the .action he had pursued.. : ■ A prltiia'faMe'cMK) had m his opinion been made butt and he felt it his duty ti commit defendaritfor trial iat the next sitting o*. the Smpreme Cjoutat Wanganui. , ,-.;■■ ., j ■ Tnie-Uiiiai'^caution "wat then read over, attar Iwbich-defendant said, « f I reserve my defence." r n _\ r " „.; „..,/ . „, IT :„,,„, : .-,^ BiLif wai Allowed, defendant :iu £100 »n4'twoliareties!in>*loo e£oV • - :! : r': #; ■