1890-02-19 — Page 4

Mr. E. Solomon, broker, said that he had had transactions with the plaintiffs in Lands, Wharves, and Electrics, to the extent of $12,000. They had had no trouble. He had offered Mr. Brandi's name since the leader, and it was no usa (laughter).

Mr. A. Gomes, broker, said that he had put through about $30,000 worth of business for the plaintif. He had never had any trouble with him. His name was less readily accepted now,

Cross-examined-The time transactions amounted to $17,000 The result was some hundreds in Brandt's favor.

A. do Soares and J. Webster proved transac- tions, mostly on time.

Mr. C. H. Drude, broker, said he had known plaintiff since 1891. Had sold shares for him since June last, altogether to the extent of $700,000 or $800,000, on time and for cash. The heaviest settlement day was August. He had made profits, and settled his losses, Witness thought the leader injured Brandt's name, though his name was not freely taken before that. He had received many orders from him which he could not execute.

Cross-examined input $5 through for Brandt in August or time. There were a few cash transactions fir settling purposes. I don't know what his gains or losses were--through me he bad to pay several thousand dollars.

Mr. A. Wieler, merchant, said-I have known the plaintiff since we were at school together, 1 know his family at Hamburg. His father was a respectable merchant, and his mother a lady. Mr. S. J. Diaby, of the firm of Benjamin and Danby, brokers, said I don't remember having told Mr. Fraser-Smith that Mr. Brandt was repudiating his transactions,

That closed the case for the plaintiff, and the Court adjourned until to-morrow morning,

NOMINAL DAMAGES.

The Supreme Court to-day (Feb, 15th) reminded one very much of Bagdad broke loose, during the conclusion of the libel suit brought against Mr. Fraser, Smith, editor and proprietor of the Hongkong Telegraph, by Oscar Brandt. The Acting Chiel Justice, and a special jury heard the case, and Mr. Robinson (instructed by Mr. Dennys) appeared for the plaintiff.

Mr. Fraser-Smith, in opening his case, said that he might with the utmost confidence have left the issue to the judgment of the jury, without saying a single word, for he was perfectly certain that they were unanimous in the opinion that the plaintiff had ignominiously collapsed in the attempt to prove his case. He had not taken that un- usual course, but he would be brief, as their valuable time had already been taken up far too long. The suit was a most simple one-it need not have taken more than three or four hours at the outside, if the plaintiff

THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1890.

rupt, what would be his assets? I don't know, but i do know that if he had been bankrapt and that statement of his dealings had come before the Court, he would have gone to gaolt I have no hesitation in saying that. And that is the man who says I have slzadered him. What did I say? There li only one sting in this article, and that is when I accuse him of selling shares that, if the market had gone agalust him, he could not have produced. There le nothing else, as his lordship will tell you

His lordship. I shall tell them that the article bas particular reference to the Grimble case.

Mr. Fraser-Smith-The article is neither more nos less than an illustration showing what the plaintiff is accused of. His lordship will tell yes that, if you find that he did what he was accured of welsher" is a very proper term.

His lordship-I don't want interrupt you, but you have not pleaded Jaiification, and I don't see how the truth can be a defence, even if you prove it.

Jibel.

His lordship-I don't think so,.

Mr. Fraser-Smith then entered the box, and said- wrote this article without malice, after investigating the circumstances. I did not know Mr. Pitman in 1882-he had never been in my office, or in my house.

13:

Your opinion was formed from reports in the papers ?—I s id it was, and on private informa- tion.

Your informants were Mr. Webber, Mr. Toeg. and Mr. Danby I think I said Mr. Toeg and Mr. Gabbay.

You have said in this article that Brand: deserved the ducking" that a welsher would get F-Probably I did I don't deny it.

Since the publication of your article on this case you have made frequent reference to Brandt He has been in Court three or four times a week and I suppose my reporter has noted it.

But apart from that ?—I don't know. You referred to him as "Broker Brandt," I think? No, I did not-it appeared in my paper. I don't deny the exprasibility.

His lordship stopped the questions, as dealing with matters subsequent to the libel

There is a report headed The Slugger Broker Again." What is a slugger ?-1 don't know; if it were "slogger" I could tell you.

There may be a Yorkshare dialect about it, perhaps.

His lordship-We all know what "slogger

means, go on.

You are the "Old Spartman "?--Yes, His lordship asked whatthat had to do with the libel, and at his hint the question was dropped.

Defendant continized My paper circulates in the coast ports and England. We exchange with the London and China Express, the Daily News, Standard, and Telegraph -not with the Weekly Dispatch. We used to. I dare say I could point to a lot of paragraphs taken from it, if I looked through the files. If you are referring to the "prize-fighting" paragraph I can tell you whee that came from. It was not from Bld. It was sent to me by the chief engineer of the Namas; one night he was dining with me, and he promised to send me “an amusing: paragraph about a local celebrity. I think it was amusing, although perhaps if I had thought over it I should not have put it in. Brandt was a friend of mine at the time; I considered nothing had happened recently between us.

Mr. Fraser-Smith then left the box, and called his witnesses.

saiten.

to his reputation by the "welcher article, his fight and who was wrong in any quirrel they

3] name had been shown to be as readily accepted had, bather is regard to riding, or settlement of as ever allowing for the unusual depression accounty, or anything else, is not material to that bad existed during the past few, months. the istue, but it may have an effect on the ques The plaintiff had not established a single claim, tion of malice. On the other hand it may not, to damages in any way, and, if the jury should because, you may thinle that any ill-feeling be against him, he asked them as business

at that time was not sufficient,to have any effect men, recollecting the evidence given by brokers on the publication of these libels. The previous like Mr. Jones-Hughes, to award, simply disputes and ill, il pre evidence, and I therefore nomical damages, co ondeared think, is necessary to draw your silention to

Mr. Robinson, in

closing the plaintiff's care, the warding of the letter. Now Highland Fling submitted that the evidence of Mr. Jones had been raced and the parties had settled. It Hughes simply showed that the plaintiff was suggested in the opening that it was the failure to take up the Panjoma was largely due failure of Highland Fling that was the cause of to the discredit thrust on him by the article, and the trouble, but there is considerable doubt about that he had had no trouble previous to the gth it, because, the relations do not appear October. It was not obligatory for him to pay its have been very strained, for Brand) was cash for the 100 Punjoms, as they bad got in the defendant's house up to the end only not been tendered-whatever Mr. Isaac, of the meetings) and for anything we know. Hughes might say but it had been previously, there was no open quarrel between the parties Arranged that they should be carried over until Brands, left Canton. You see this letter Bet although Mr. Brandt had a legal, begins with very serious charge on the face of defence, when he found that the seller sit against Mr. Brandt. The defendant, writes to in difficulties he took up, the shares. With him on are qnly a shallow rogue after all. respect to the other hundred, bo did what we had you given the matter the slightest considera- frequently done, and paid to have them canted, son, I hardly think you would have over-renched over. He had to pay pretty heavily, it was true yourself and placed yourself in such a thoroughly that was because of the discredit and prejudice ignoble position for the sake of a few hundred attaching to him through the article. With dellaw However you have done so, and you respect to the argument that the plaintiff had will have to bear the consequences" And then delayed bringing an action aboyt, the 1886 libel, he goes into, matters of account. He charges it was self evident that he could not brought Mr. Brandt, with obtaining morey under faise at the time without greatly injuring bimself pretences, obtaining money which belonged to The same explanation held good with regard to bla (the defendant), and then he says-and this the prize-fighting" paragraph. Plaintiff did net come into Court and spread the mattes far and wide until he was compelled to do so in' self-defence, but he was still entitled to damages for the injury to his feelings. Its publication was evidence of the defendant's malice. He had consistently slandered plaintiff ever since he wrote "If I don't receive a cheque for the $200 odd look out"; and you had better settle up if you want to avoid trouble you will never get over," He had the power, and the plaintiff was the victim. How was the $80,000 made by thế -plalatiff? By judgment, and courage, buying, at the right time and selling at the right time, He exercised his brains, and risked his moncy, why should not he be let alone 1. He only asked that right-he, gave po provocation, to defendant. Yet he was brought into public on the pretence of a small shate transac tion, and libelled in the most malignant way, as a "weltber," a parlab, not only in? his social and, family relations, but in his character as man. Throughout that case the defence,, who had not set up justifica tion, had cart every possible slur on the plainte They had even descended to the low petrinens of the spying Old Sportsman, bringing the Club Coffee book to show that the plaintiff had defrauded the Race Fund out of $5 a year ten", years ago. With this point the learned counsel unexpectedly resumed his seat.

ཚ་

·His lordship then adjourned fórtifio, and, or resuming, proceeded to sum up. He spoke for an hour and a quarter-sometimes inaudibly,

the material part of the letter" Now to prevent ange misunderstanding, I tell you plainly list, if I do not receive a draft - for that amount on or before April 15th you will have to bear the consequences. I shail expose you not only in Hongkong but in Shanghai, Focchow, Amoy, and throughout the Far East.

statement of my case, with the necessary docu- think I can promise you that when I lay a mentais exigence, before the public through the diam of the Telegraph, and before every 2.tribunal, in China, your, racing career

sher. A good excuse has been wanted

• Lime by the racing authorities, not only Shanghal, to justify your being ned af for life - Now that undoubtedly is u tbreak by the delpudant to use his newspaper,

kang, Telegraph, as a means of showing intiff if he did not settle the accounts. ukis $715.43 and says "If you do not ball, show you up in the Hongkong Tele

dont think you can have any doubt bout the meaning of that letter. But the defen-

dant has told you be never intended to carry out threate and I only wanted my money,

intended to use my newspaper to tens, and you must also bear that in question is not a question of the good the defendant in this matter. It is hether, you can see in this letter ction with what may have been the defendant's mind for writing against

Can you see the beginning of a idence leading to, thẻ conclusion that these articles were written the mind was maliciously affected as

the igilir as letters containing, covert to the letter of 28th March. They do not hidden „hrents." They are very different

them collectively is the evidenica which has been Pole//t Chints in the bick the plaintiff :

pony on joint account. Although, a week before

luck with Highland Fling or Bottles. I did not the races, he brought the pany roun--for be was

mean: Brandt when I wrote of a race beling a good and assiduous trainer-and we got him to

thrown away by a tinker." I have called

a. "tinker" many the post, the only money risked on him was in

hien.

time he was rested at the Lusitano Club by Brandt, unknown

the biggest tinker" I ever saw. I was to me-I never knew until after the races, and it

never on unfriendly terms with him except. only amounted to a trifle. It was a disastrous

when we were writing abusive letters to each. mexting for me but not through Highland

others. I may have said, in one letter, that he Fiing. I had pony called Bothwell, the

know I did not race simply for what I could faverite for the Valley Stakes and German Cup

make, but that I believed in the axiom that hard wak deserved to be paid for, and that I was which I backed to win a fortune, Brandt trained

trebly anxious to win at the approaching meeting, it in his own way, a way calculated to deceive the on-lookers. His plan was, on entering the

as the whole of the "tinkers in the Colony bad been vowing vengeance because, of our success straight, to kick the pony along and pull him back at the same time. His horsemanship-his

(Brandt's and mine) the year before. Brandt artistic diplomacy-overshot the mark. The

wasn't a #tinker" who upset a lot of other pony statied for the Valley Staves-I rode the

"tinken" We had had a grosperous meeting, second string myself-a brute that could not get

thanks to Mr. Hutchins. I got Brandt to ride for me, not because I could not get anyone else, but within a hundred yards of him, but I beat him

it is difficult to get jockeys. He was not a "fast a good long way. The pony had been taught

resort " he was a partner. to stop-and he stopped, and was absolutely

Yes, but you say he could not ride-why didn't beaten aff. In the German Cup he made a little

Mr. Fraser-Susith-I will leave you, genile you stipulate that he should not ride?-I wish I better show, but he was un-placed. In the Brokers' Cup he WAS

was men, to say, after you have heard the had, if. Mr. Bidwell had, been on Highland second, -- be far away the best pony, on the course evidence, whether you think the plaintiff Fling there would have been a different tale to and on the third day he won the Cathay Cup is entitled to a verdict. I think I may safely say tell. He and I were racing friends. There was in a common canter from the ponies that that, however mistaken I may be in my view, I nothing irregular in Brandt and I entering into had beaten him in the Derby. It was on him have done good a very great deal of good-in a racing partnership-it was a legitimate con- that I lost the large amount of $7,000 or $8,003 the articles I have written against the enormous federacy then.: The consideration for the use of -not Highland Fling. He never won a race

amount of share gambling which has proved so Highland Fiing was a good deal more than $10 afterwards, except at a Sky meeting at Shanghal disastrous in his Colony. Time after time I have Those confederacies are not allowed now. It was an eventful meeting. We won the warned the public, through the columns of my His lordship pointed out that these were not Ladies Purse with Second Violin, and the paper I have almost invariably been tight, and the issues,

You prosecuted Mr. Brandt for libelling you, Consolation Cup with Allegro. After that race I think I have some. daim on the public in this Brandt was objected to for foul riding by Mr. matter, and some claim on your attention as to didn't you ?--Yes, I had no option but to do so. Tennant, of Gibb Livingston's Informally having been inspired by malicious motives in. You admitted that you knew nothing, personally, objected to. I had an interview with Mr.writing this article. It was based, as has been about the share transactions 7-Personally I knew Shepherd, of Foechow, the owner of Mr. shewn, on the reports in the newspapers and on nothing. Tennant's mount, and I pointed out to him information I received as to the plaintiff's reck that the objection would scarcely hold water,

leas dealings. By accident I was in Court and as the affair occurred three-quarters of u

heard the final speeches and summing-up. You mile from home-(Brandt had run him on to

know the widespread ruin and misery which exists here at the present time, Don't you the rails)-it was too far off to affect the issue. Mr. Shepherd, as a racing man of great think men like Brandi aret blame for it? I have no hesitation-saying that men like Grimble and experience, assented to that at once, and no objection was made. I tell you this to show that it Brandt have been the principal causes of it could not have been Highland Fling's defeat that When a man without means, without standing caused any quarrel between myself and Brandt, almost without character-goes and employs or we should surely have parted there and then, brokers wholesale to sell shares he does but it was on the fourth day. We had a pony, not possess I have no hesitation in saying that it is a thoroughly immoral practic, and in which we were partnera, called Scotch Reel.

one which is dishonest and opposed to the The Derby, I should have told you, had been won by Mr. Guedes, with a pony called Ambas public good. We saw the brokers come in ador, and he had given a cup for the off-day, to one by one yesterday one of them apparently be called the Ambassador's Cup. But the high-freak from the nursery, who told us in piping tones that he had done business to the extent of toned sportsmen of Hongkong would not race for a cup presented by a Portuguese, and Scotch $50,000 for the plaintiff a most lisreputable slate Reel had the option of walking over for it. I of things, which deserved to be thoroughly shewn said "No, we'll make a race, nt any rate," and up and exposed. I leave the law to his lordship suggested that Brandt and I should declare that to deal with, simply urging that a fair and the confederacy in Scotch Reel" off." We did bonest comment on a judicial proceeding, in open so, and I entered my pany against his. Mine Court, if not strictly accurate in detail, is not a had confined himself, the matters, at issue,

won. It was said that Brandt had "roped" my but by introducing a lot of extraneous matter pony, and in the weighing-room Mr. Coxon-a for the purpose of proving express malice-man for whom I have the highest respect although he was not seeking special damages made some observations about Brandt's riding. and unearthing a lot of musty, evil-smelling We. quarrelled, and nearly came to ústicuffs. letters of years gone by--letters that had nothing was reported for unseemly behaviour, and Brandt for foul riding. An investigation was to do with the case he had not only mixed up

ordered to be held by the Stewards, to whom I

Cross-examined-He was not there in 1881 the issues but had wasted a good deal of valus. able time and also compelled him (Mr. Fraser-

wrote vindicaling mytelf and expressing regret

His lordship did not think it was material that in the heat of the moment I had used

Defendant-I do not recollect the case of Smith) in self-vindication, to deal with the maiters which he had brought forward-He language that I should not have used, to a man Pilman v. Keswick except by hearsay. That then read the pleadings and answer, and, con-

nkl enough to be my father. They were satin- was in 1880 or 1881. I did not know Mr. Pitman tinuing, said that the question, really was

fied with that, and Mr. Coxon withdrew, bis

at that time--I had seen him. The Telegraph whether he was justified, in his position as a complaint. With regard to Brandt, it had been was started on the rsth June 1881. Mr. Pitman Journalist, in writing as he did of the plaintiff's arranged that he should be suspended for one was not in my printing office in 1881; I had connection with the Grimble case. The other year, but I used what little influence I had; and, none. He might have been in the office where side had endeavored, by the production of the on consideration, the Stewards merely cautioned my paper was printed-in da Souza's office. Telters referring to former racing associations, him. All this time he lived in my house-we Some of the I. O. U.'s I referred to are included | and by introducing the names of Mr. Pitman were the best of friends, and parted so. He had in the account I sent to Brandt. I. could prob. and Mr. Bidwell, so insinuate that a combina drawn on me for a considerable amount-$287,

ably have sued on them. I told him in my letter tion, or conspiracy, had existed for a number of

for which I bave bis 1.0 U, and which be bas that if he didn't pay he was to look, em." years between them and him for the pur never repaid. He went down to Mr. Chater tá

I did not "back out of my threat to "make pose of injuring the plaintiff's reputation and get some money belonging to me, haying pre-

trouble which he would never get over-I simply prospects. They had attempted to make the viously drawn other moneys of mine from Mr. dropped it on second thoughts. I particularly jury believe the most extraordinary proposition Murray: When the bill was sent to me from the referred to bis getting the money from Mr. ever put forward in a court of law. They Lusitana Club, for the lottery in which Brandt had Chater and Mr. Murray. He told me before he left had endeavored, first, to make it appear that bought Highland Fling, I wrote to him one of the my house that he would get the money from Mr. Brandt had lost the putting through of the loan letters put in. An acrimonious correspondence

Chater and send it up to me. He was collecting of Tha 700.000, through the Lum Hon ensued-angry men use angry words, and threats it because he had acted for me in the transaction. paragraph. That paragraph was a simple state. were thrown out on both sides. In the autumn I charge him with, obtaining the money under ment of fact, in which there was nothing that this had worn off, and Brandt made advances false pretences. In the report ofthe criminal action could be called into question, and if Brandt felt to me, suggesting that we should shake hands. I brought against Brandt my letter was quotedand injured he had only to write correcting the I did so, and, hearing that he was coming down reported in the Telegraph. I did not correct the report and it would have been at once rectified, to race again I offered to take Second Violin proofs of the report. In one sentence of it the But he did not do so. With respect to the "Prize and another pony. He was only too willing to

words "without evidence" were omitted from the fighting" paragraph, it was simply a ridiculous do so, but he had already engaged with Mr.

letter. It continues that bin (Brandt's enemies jake published in the Weekly Despatch, taken da Silva; that was why he didn't send the pony evidence enough to get him expelled from any can do nothing.". I have produced some of that from the New York Sun, After those two He came here, and we were on the most intimate widely-read papers had published it to the world terms. He says he never spoke to me again, Race Club. I say that the letter was not a how could its republication by an obscure paper He lies--I was as friendly with him as could be

"black mailing" letter, I wanted Second Violin like the Hongkong Telegraph injure the plain for weeks. With regard to the Odawara mystery, to be my property for the next race meeting tiff? Yet he had the audacity to ask the jury to that pony-one of the best ever brought here

Do you know that Brand: had raced in believe that through that he lost his connection was entered for the Derby in the name of Mr. my colors, the three previous meetings? It le with the Canton Government! They all knew da Silva-a man who had never raced before, a legal point whether the pony could have how the London comic papers lampooned and who was therefore supposed by the public been seized if I had become bankrupt during public men, depicting them as pugilists, to be a "greenborn," Impetusso was entered in the meeting. He had been my partner and rider etc., and yet they never claimed enormous

Brandt's name, and was made a very hot favorite during the previous three years on the sme damages for it. I was sheer nonsense. The they rushed him on the public, keeping terms as I then offered-half the winnings references in the paragraph to Brandt's parents, Odawara dark, and getting all they could on him was not going to produce my evidence, and get if meant or taken seriously, were very wrong, quietly. Something transpired at the Kowloon him turned out of the Club, because my affairs but, read with the rest of the paragraph, they had Club lotteries which gave rise to suspicion, and

were not public matters. It would have been a no more weight than the serio-comic solemnity went down to the course before daylight nice thing to have turned round on a man that of the teamed counsel when descanting on them,

one morning and timed Odawara. And I let the had been living in my house to turn round and With respect to the leader of the 9th Oct., the public know it, I had killed Brandt's little game, have him ostracised-turned out of the Club, be chief subject for their consideration, the plaintiff's and that caused a quarrel, But we have been cause of angry feelings that had passed away. It allegation was that it had runed his business 1.00 friendly terms since-two years ago we were

did not affect my conduct even when he did not Mr. Robinson-That is not the date Mr. as a share-broker-or rather share speculator, a chatting together on the race-course se though come down to me, I heard that he was Brandt mentioned, and I object to its being dealer in "differences" rather than a legitimate there had been nothing between us, and we had coming down to Mr. da Silva. It was rumored mentioned. trader. He had tried to patch the three things a drink together in the Hongkong Hotel the same

at the time that Brandt would not be allowed. Witness-Up to the 4th Jong the balance was together by bringing before the jury a mass of night. Vel Brandt says I have been trying to ruin to ride agalo sald. I must have old only 89.56. The first entry on the 4th, lies. The truth was pretty well obtained in the him all these years conspiring with Mr, Bidwell Fiddie, some-one else has under-lined it! (The $4.499.56. On the 13th it was $4.741.57. There cross-examination of the plaintiff and his army of and Mr, Pitman! With regard to the real matter examined the letter). I did not notice is no balanes of $5,800 at any time in the But the question of the state of the defendant vit brokers-his status as a share speculator, and as at issue the share business, you have heard that at the trial of the criminal action, month, die Bonded a merchant and, commission agent, was pretty from Brandt himmelf that he started with a capital or I should have pointed it out. In my Cross-examined. On the x1th so mind le material in bother torport, and this is ver

$1,150 was | un the question of damages, because, 35 clearly shewn. He had falsely and knowingly of $5,800. We shall see presently whether that is letter of the 28th March I said I think I paid out. The credit balance before was heard from the learned counsel for the gone into the witness box and perjured himself true or not. He said he had $10,000 worth of can promise you that when Flay's statement $4 157 36. On one occasion there wasa balance in his opening, damages la cares of dort are

Den restricted to the question of compenistión, but half-a-dozen times. For instance, he said that land of Shanghai. I have no hesitation lo of my case, with the necessary documentary of over $500 when living with the speaker in 1881 he saw Mr. asking you not to believe it. Heconfessed that in evidence, before the public through the Joseph Samuel, broker, said bare known restraint also comes in its really on common-sense way of looking at it. II Pitman to the office reading proofs and writing a few months he did business in "differences medium of the Telegraph and before the plaintiff since May last. I met him in the

man a thief, and I'do it because I have received. articles, whereas he (Mr. Fraser-Smith) actually not legitimate share deali gto the tuns of every racing tilbudald Coins, your adog Hongkong Hotel. He asked me to sell shares did not know Mr. Pitman until 1884 Plaintiff $1,800,oco. Now you must know that with a career has fiolebed. A good excuse has been for him. I sold shares to the value of $123,000 Information from others do it supposing the also said he saw Major Palmer there. Major margin of $5,800-or, four times that-nowlted for for some time by the racing author only $400 were cash transactions. He settled statement to be true and thinking it necessar Patmer was never in the speaker's office in his life. honest man could safely go in and sell rities not only here but in Shanghai to justify your most of contracts directly with the principals for the protection of the outside world/211 It was said that he (the speaker), had expressed to that extent. But ble business was not being "warned of" for life-saved you in Hong. He had one loss of $600, and wanted to give man is not thiet 1 do what a wronghuh malice against Brandt-he had sworn it buying and selling-when he made Hule kong after you had been condemned as a livery promissory note.: 1 bave sued him for broker. I must suffer the consequences. - - Bat-1}/g/

MENALANDA Bợn the man was a thief, knowing him (not ta because Highland Fling lost the Derby in 1883 money he went and "squared up with stable keeper and unfit to race with gentlemen. age, and got it. Llars should have good memories. A few the unfortunate victims; he would take any and I bave what they require ready to my band Cross-examined. There were prof is on the thief having no reason to believe him to 15 weeks ago, in that Court, Brandt had sworn, thing, and glad to get it. I think I may say, I referred to racing matter. You are probably transactions, 40 PE week thich, be being person I wish to infors before his lordship and a special jury, that subject to his lordship's correction, that it has as well aware stam if that is the way that Mr. Isaac Hughes, broker, zaid-Last July. I to satisfy some private spite of my own, thatw he (Fraser Smith) bore bim malice because been laid down that a grievance between buyers editors usually collect their accounts.. "It would was acting for Hughes and Erra. I sold Brandt: be s'very differrit Eseu in daodfand the ca be (Brand) would not give him Second respecting differences are gaming contracts.

bp a most unusual” Way. I had no intention of 200 Panjoms on time for August-100 at 839, world be great. The amount of démages Wor Violin, Not a word was said about Highland His lordship-It is a question if the stock carrying it out?" As I am not a “black-maller" and 105 a 3407 I fendered them on the 31st be guided on différent considerations in thei Fling in Brende's ingeniously-worded defence, was to be delivered it is considered a legal con- Cannot say that that is the black-mailer" "ay, and he refused them, saying he could not take | case. In the one case compensation) in the

compensation and punfähment tri although he had been generously allowed tract, if it is a mere matter of differences it bad then, and have still a good deal of ingurace them up. He did not offer any compromise, to plead justification at the last moment, He is gathing, Although this may be legal it does a racing circles. He owed me money, and Mr. Jones Hughes of Hughes and Esraj - In my opinion is the materialis of t

to express malice in this case, it has thought something else would be required, so not really affect the question of honesty and wanted it there was no public interest in the by kers said-In July we had a transaction. he put in one letter a letter read in this case morality, because although the Courts do not matter to justify my showing him up. It was with Brandf, as stated by the last witness on the question of whether the also taking particular care not to read a entertain gaming contracts, for the reason that not that I did not want to cleanse the Augean Brands told me on the goth that he would dustained or not. Perhaps the ore proceed previous letter which let the light of day in on it is thought better to leave the parties to settle stable. I have not to my knowledge, ince not take up the shares, as he had been any few words as to these differentelital bia nefarious plans and schemes. In 1882 be them in their own way, yet if the contract is written regretting that indiscriminate entries disappointed by Chinese buyers. Thad y'after aspirately, I had better call your attention to the and I arranged a racing partnership for 1883, for the delivery of stocks, although there is a were allowed in the Jockey Club, I did not seek the sentement be called and offered $1,000 to evidence that has been offered in respect to the owing to a sweepstakes I had entered into with gambling element in it, they do take cognisance toestablish a madingconfederacy with him when I have the shares carried over. There was contention that the defendant was sinuated b five well-known gentlemen' in this colony. 1 of then. But don't think that has may bearing wrote abour Second Viblin, I wanted him to ride difference of $3,400 due. He afterwards arranged express malice with a view offefaring the plaintif have dozens of letters, written during the year, on this issue.

Second Violla for me if I bought him for the with the ler of one too, and the other foo Now there is a great deal "hics we kr to prove that but he doesn't deny it he can't. Mr. Fraser-Smith-No, this is more a question meeting, and it would be secessary to have were carried over to October, at fifty cents a 'di both sides which I do not think is mater He accordingly came down here, with Highland of fact than of law. The plaintiff in this salt joint account for that purpose. I thought that are interest. He did not take them up in and as far as I can shall try to Fling and other ponies. It is perfectly true that his actually confessed that, when he began he was then deserving of being warned off October. On the and November he paid $1,000, my opinion as to what is materiai Highland Fling went lame-It is anabsolute false to sell these hundreds of thousands of dollars and he afterwards was waided-offitis and the real afterwards by instalments. It is a 883 the parties seem to have been hood that I lost more than $200 or $300 over worth of Sugar shares he had not one, so that, notorious fact. He came down after my feiler, all been paid now

derma. In 1883 we find that they had him. The pony went lame three or four weeks apart from the legal aspect of the case, there fa to race with da Silva, He did not let me Mr Fraser-Smith, in closing, bl case, said cause of differencer. That before the maces, before we had time to put any a moral and business point of view which must have Second Violin I

have had that he had only to add a few words, on the year of: Highland-Fling, money on him at all I think there was only appear to you as business men. Yet he comes him at gift.] don'

sion question of damages. There was no evidence leat I think that the letter | one lottery held before that, pad at that I did here and asks you to vindicate his character and that Mr. Herman Melcher

400g to shew that the plantin had been lojured id by the defendant to the plab

they, that his credit bad that meeting may be not purchase the pony. He went lame, which award him a modest sum of fly thousands for the pony after the races

busingią – jeputation? "you" av CORT stopped his training, and of course destroyed dollars damages, and costs. In it not true this accomptineversked him

ingia dollara Tharga ishon whatever chances he might have had originally this man went in and, if the market had turned loss on the $1, po swenpatak

intiff, had anmikil, of winning any races you can't win the Derby a dollar or two dollars, against him he could see because Mr. Guedes won with a pony that is lama three weeks before the possibly have paid ? His learned counsel said pool. In my barsgraphi day. forbade Mr. Brandt to purchase the something yesterday about—If he were bank- sportlog I did not refer

Mr John Piuman said—I am a merchant, residing in Canton. I have been there since 1884. I first became acquainted with you when I returned from Torquin, at the end of 1883. I knew you by sight before. I never was in your office or printing office before. I had sent one article to you in 1881. If the plaintiff says he saw me there in 1882 he is mistaken, I knew him by sight.

Cross-examined-I use Mr. Fraser-Smith's office as mine now-have done so for the last eighteen months

Achmet Ramjabm, broker, said-1' have been a broker about four years. I have known the plaintiff five or six years. We were associated in share transactions in July, and August last, "He came to me, and sold me some Sugars. He asked me to sell Sugars for him, not saying how many. I sold about, jo shares between July and August. They were all sold on time, for delivery at various dates. Some of the contracts were not completed, Brandt

di settling with some of the principals.

His lordship pointed out that all this was evidence of justification. │....... Mr. Fraser-Smith therefore ceased to examine." Mr. Archibald Stewart, sub-accountant at the Chartered Bank, said-I produce the ledger showing that the plaintiff's balance on the 29th June last was $919-90.||

I not bernilipalted, japr.

fored 3o the extent

as

the cross amination to tho Fines) In fated all that talk about his losing the commis

mylls to won the $700,000.” At to the All d fojury

by several jockeys for foul riding, and that Stare got to be allowed to ride again in Shang..

[ Ebner) is not true, as it would be a serious due for yont – Then he speaks about theic ar

michts, which he says cannot be on the dms, kha,then he adds-"'I want you to. send down Second Violina

and any other pony you consider sure to win a race." hoʻdffect, answer to that. There is a letter from Mr. Brand, of the jed December, but there fe no reference in that to the res guest for Second Violin, Mr. Smith, in

His Lordship said-Gentlemen of the jury the subject on which I have to address you is really Tere three actions joined into one, as you will have regards the plaintiff? It does not appear that already gathered. The subject of the plaintiff's that letter was answered. The money was not petition is three separate libels, and I know no other way of leaving the questions involved topald, but the threat was not carried out. In the autumn of the stime'year we find further corres you than by dealing with these three questions pondence The letter of November 15th and the separately and putting the question to you

ba

"letter of hoth December, have been referred. each separately. But of counts there is a great deal in the case which applies tothem collectively. and aboutthat I shall have to say afew words with reference to them all. Now that which applies to

#dffect accusations of wrong-doing. given in support of the plaintiff's contention that says are bidden threats. It is a question for you thedefondant, in writing these libels, was actuated to aether, they are so deeply hidden you by express malice. That is a matter which Ens cannot discover them, or whether you can follow some bearing on each of these cases, Now when

the defendant in saying these letters indicate a I come to deal with the pleadings shall have continued feeling. On the 13th November, to explain to you the meaning, of defendant's "Be Writeks Teis reported here that you were plea as to alleged privilege. I shall have to tell you that in my opinion the occasions of which there articles were written did not afford 'any, privilege; it is necessary" 18 'mention that i now because it has a hearing on the question of “ malice. The word "malice" runs throughouf our law books and cases and is always used: by counsel, and it is necessary to use it in the sense the law understand it. "But in order to prevent confusion on your part it is necefsary for me to say, as far as I know, exactly what the legal meaning of the word is, because if I did not you might be doubt as to the dia. which exists between malice la law and, known as malice in fact-express maliče“: libel is said to be false and maliciously writer if the writing la published but that does not exacly mean that the defendant was actuated by witled and malicious motives. The allegation of malices according to the legal definition, may be satisfied) without any evidenceofthe fact that the defendant- has malice in his mind. The way it la pat ie this?

has been some talk about your If a man says something to the injury, of another

here, and I have beard the bgly something that injures hir' character, which is

Peused "more", than once... "You. not true, the law implies malice for the purpose

Bemies here, but without evidenco | of satisfying the legal, definition of libel..... The

nothing and whatever may law implies what perhaps really does not cais-

Tely on my doing nothing to implies malice from the wrongul act and it to DEM felt very bitterly against you last suficient, in certain cases not privileged by the

not wilkout cause, I think: However, ull || occasion, that the act should be gongfal in that

änk vong, and I am not the man to serie and without malice, in tup isennd of the checka uklo

unimosity, or to injure any, libel having been written by the prompter of body maliciously mention this wo that you malicious and, wicked wind I have told you need nơi Bồ- to make whatever arrange that this occasion was not piirdeged, and there mental yad think proper with sty other person fore for the maintenance of this action: Co in Hongkong,, bals must have Old Fiddle." suficient that the defendant's act was Wrongful. You the object of Old Fiddle (or Second

first about malpractices. stud ways “I want Second Violin." Mr. Smith writer again to Brandt on the jath December, He speaks first about the bd, and then be my

Boob kliz

fhall, be glad to havs Old Fiddle, ni pochów Races da you like." It wonid Flet him bava at least a fortnight's aner his arrival, considering the time he Beenkyld"training" Then he goes on

oned in connection with the sub, Abroad' about Bandt, "I must We know of course that he And you must take these of them fairly,"Donors prei motives, unless you "ate very Give what falt weight you сад (öns, 45-you think they'sre "con, "letter, It' 'Is well to remember chure that may havo á considerable

Ulast of these letters is the frothi 1985 and it in only fair that you meärber thât it was two years and two Beforf, the first of the libel) **com, ined of li tik” case was published: - It lo boufid not only from previous "correspons een the "parties that you are: 19

malles, You can pre used in the oda theme matters, absequent writing" having

· subject mater of the libélj not complained of at libellons, ther used for the purpose of showing the Fa dialicious mind. "You may even

to's certain extcht, althouígh

afe to place ng much reliance the conduct of the defabdant in has chosen to refer to other hich-kis Crosseramination hai You will hav Judge, of the

ger

can seg

terial to

estion part

HAD

rell and operation