In a case of the kind now before me the
damages are at large; once actual financial loss is
proved (and that has been done), the Court may
award a sum appropriate to the whole circum-
stances of the tortious wrong inflicted (Prati v.
British Medical Association, 1919, 1 KB. 244).

As regards the extent of the pecuniary loss
suffered by the plaintiffs through the picketing,
evidence was given by Gertrude O’Neal of a
substantial decrease in the volume of their trace
since the commencement of picketing. One would
have thought that the plaintiffs, who are now
pressing for heavy damages, would have come
prepared with properly made up account books to
support their claim. Even when Mr. Barrow
called for such books, however, they failed to
produce satisfactory accounts to show their actual
sales subsequent to and immediately preceding the
institution of the picketing. The evidence of
Clarine Knight that since the picketing she has
“missed” regular customers, can hardly be
regarded as impelling. She mentioned only two
names, and there is no proof nt all as to the real
reasons of these two persons for ceasing to buy
from O’Neal’s. Mr. Barrow suggested that they
may, for reasons altogether. unconnected with the
picketing, have transferred their patronage to the
new drug store opened by Laurent, formerly
druggist at O’Neal’s. Laurent’s testimony was to

~

0

the effect that others have done so. I am not
unmindful of yet another possibility, and that is
that some people, without ever having gone near
to the pickets, may nevertheless feel that Miss
Winter’s cause merits their support and may of
their own free will have taken away their patron-
age from the plaintiffs’ stores.

There will be judgment for the plaintiffs
against the defendants jointly and severally for
£80 and an injunction will be granted restraining
the defendants their servants and agents from
watching and besetting the business places of the
plaintiffs situate at the corners of Long and Thames
Streets and High and Thames Streets, St. John’s,
The defendants must also pay the plaintiffs’ costs
excluding the costs of and incidental to the joining
of the defendant Hurst as a defendant, the Court
having already ordered that those costs should in
any event be paid by the plaintiffs, and excluding
also the costs of and incidental to the two applica-
tions for an interlocutary injunction, in respect of
which each party must bear his own costs, the
plaintiffs having failed to obtain such interlocutary
injunction partly through their own fault.

W. A. Date,
Puisne Judge.
3rd January, 1956.

ANTIGUA.
Printed at the Government Printing Office, Leeward Islands, by E. M, BLACKMAN,
Government Printer—By Authority.
1956.

[Price 20 cenis.]