[libel – clergyman, unchristian conduct of ]

Wigmore v. Horne

Supreme Court of Van Diemen’s Land

Montagu J., 20 December 1842

Source: Hobart Town Advertiser, 23 December 1842

            For the plaintiff, Mr. Stewart; for the defendant, Mr. McDowell, with Mr. Pitcairn.

            This was an action for libel, contained in a letter, written by Francis Horne, in September, 1841, to the Rev. Phillip Palmer, the acting Archdeacon, complaining of the conduct of Mr. Wigmore, as unchristian and otherwise derogatory to the character of a clergyman. The defendant pleaded the general issue - damages were laid at £2000.

            Mr. Stewart, in stating the case to the jury, observed that the action would have been brought before this time, had it not been deferred at the instance of the Defendant himself it would be contended, perhaps, that the letter, which contained the libel, was a privileged communication to the acting Archdeacon, as the head of the ecclesiastical establishment in this colony; but no communication was privileged, unless made in the course of a judicial enquiry. It might also be contended, that the language of the letter was not libellous, but he, Mr. Stewart, would read the letter, when the jury would see whether it was not, - as addressed to a Minister of the Church of God, one of the foulest libels that was ever conceived or published.

            The Rev. Mr. Palmer, acting-Archdeacon, was examined, who proved the receipt of the letter, but stayed that he did nothing, as regarded Mr. Wigmore, in consequence.

            On his cross-examination by McDowell, Mr. Palmer said, that if any clerical misconduct has been attributed to Mr. Wigmore, it would have been his duty, as the head of the establishment, to investigate it. This authority, as acting Archdeacon had been acknowledged by the secretary of state, but he did not know, whether the Bishop had recognised it.

            Dr. Bedford was examined as to the inuendoes, and their application to the plaintiff; but failing to do so, to the full extent, as stated in the declaration.

            His Honor suggested a nonsuit, to which the plaintiff, at first objected, but eventually consented. The plaintiff was accordingly called.

            There was another action entered by Mr. Wigmore, against Mr. B. Horne, for libel in the Courier, but that was withdraw.