ness stated that he had years in Hongkong on newspapers and had eight months ax a reporter on British evening paper in Tientsin. Te affirmed hearing the name Joseph Tuck from one of the witnesses ait! gave ax his reason for changing the! ame to Franklin Tuck at the next] hearing, that the name Franklin Tock had been used that time i court, not because he had beet threatened with the action, had not found the name Joseph Tuck. sheet, when he had eer the writ had bee Defendants The hearing was concluded on findings that was no libel and giving judge for the defendants with exists.
The hearing was occupiob with the summing up of counsel Newman summed up his ler two main heads ing from the other, namely, that Ube report was a fair and accurate account of judicial proceedings and as such was entitled ifed privilege; and that the article did not refer and was not intended to refer to the plaintitl.
Ting based his statement that the name Josep Tock had not been mentioned court and Ubat therefore the reporter aul made a mistake in using the name, and the account was thus a fair and accurate report; and if the report was not accurate as. to the rane, all other accuracy and fairness was of no use, A number of precedents were cited on both sides, Qualified Privilexe vdigmeng His Lovdship> junsel in the ease had left it to to be both judbza and jury, As judge he had to instruct himself on the lay evi he had to dh n the fi as judge to Judgment, In dealing with the ata' ment of claim he said that the pla tit claimed damages as a result argiele appearing in the "Shang-hal "Fines" of Seplembor 22 under the heading "Chinese Cheque artist guilty to #8 charges" while nue: *Ninety-ought changes frowd by" yieans of worthless and sbbterfage, were pin Tuck wi muy aliases admitted the arti fit did not refer to th fair The 0 ut sai! that plainti ant ile and without malice, They, claimed qualified privilege.
order to come under the qualtfed privilege, said His Lordship, the report mist be (1) fair and accurate; (2) contemporaneous; (i) a report of public proceedings: vite] and not obscene or blasphemous Under these headings he found that the article was contemporaneous, of public proceedings, and not obscene br blasphemous. On the eviden:9 hie found that there was no malice, neither the reporter mor the pro Prietor of the paper having pre-Niously heard of the plaintiff. The question he ind to decide wes Whether the report was fair and curate. THe quoted legal precedent determine what was fair and rate and then dealt with the Aaposition of "Sas Which is eaxential to a lawyer, Hist Client, therefore, took a serious Of the article complained of. In ply to the denial of the defence that] the article did not refer to the plain stated that on the day the article Toss to explain. gossip and speculation as to his cood een an article on the same day in the "North. China Daily News" beaded "The notorious Mr. Tuck." had been in court during the trial of the man reported, but the name} id not lien used, 80 far want: the man's name was] listened very actively in court, as he was defending another I was von eontrazed on his own, Conver four or five years. article on September 24 or 25 on his return to Shanghai, and connected another man in the account wi Mr, Lin who of Mr, Tuck's. was referred to, He was to read of the occurrence, Tiot concern him, he had not made} charge sheet. had ever called! on Mr. RT. Bry police prosecutor, fur into arrested Tsang, ie. 8. Q. Liew, Tack, the evidence for the pro-When 9
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.