Lists (None yet)

Login to create lists

Tagged (None yet)

Add Tags

Comments (None yet)

Add New Comment

2 corrections, most recently by Schwede66 - Show corrections

Alleged Libel.

MR. EDEN GEORGE, M.L.A., SUMMONED.

His Honor Judge Backhouse had before him in Sydney yesterday an action in which Ernest William Dechow, of Dawes Point, a Govern ment official, sued Eden George, M.L.A., photographer, of George-street, for £200 damages for alleged libel. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant falsely and maliciously wrote and published of him the following words in a weekly news paper, called "The Australian News," under  

the heading "Undesirable characters" : —   "Electioneering canvassers in many cases are   respectable men, who seek votes for a candi date in whose views they are in accord, but as a statesman once said, there are some can vassers who sink to the lowest depths of degradation, and are prepared to accept money from any candidate and vilify and invent villainous lies about his opponents. There are two men with a reputation now operating in Belmore electorate. One man named Dechow, who is an elector of Belmore   Ward, is on Alderman Fitzgerald's committee. Ho worked on Mr. George's committee at the last election, and was well paid for what he did Alter the election he sent a letter to Mr. George stating that he expected a special grant of at least £25. (This letter may be seen by anyone interested). But the expected £25 was not to be extracted from Mr. Eden George, who asserted ho hod over a 100 better and more reliable supporters than Mr. Dechow, and since the refusal this man has invented statements in reference to his work at the cemetery, which, after full enquiry at the Works Department, have been found to be absolute lies."... It is suggested   that it would be to the interests of both Alderman Fitzgerald and Mr. H. Cohen to rid themselves of these men mentioned, as their connection only tends to disgrace the candidature of their principles," meaning thereby that the plaintiff was a man of un desirable character, that he was not respect able or fit to associate with his follow citizens, but was entirely without principle, and would, for the purpose of making money, sink to the lowest depths of degradation, with the result that plaintiff was greatly injured in his credit, reputation, and good

name. The defence was a general denial of the statement of plaintiff. Plaintiff, in giving evidence, said that he had been a member of Mr. George's com mittee at the last Parliamentary election, and he admitted that he had written to the defendant after the election stating that he   expected £25. He had retired from the election himself in favor of Mr. George, and had then accepted a position as one of his canvassers at 10s a day. There was no truth   in the paragraph complained of, and which referred to him. After further evidence had been taken the   defendant stated that he was not connected with the paragraph complained of in any way, and was not responsible for its publi cation. ... The plaintiff was nonsuited.  

Zoom

plus
thumb
minus
left
thumb
right
up
thumb
down