Does the word "adverse" mean something between unfavourable and hostile?

But in the later case of Boland v. Globe & Mail Ltd., supra, Schroeder J.A. cast doubt on that interpretation by suggesting that adverse may mean something between unfavourable and hostile. At pp. 422-23 he said: The legislators manifestly sought after and used a term to depict a disposition of mind of the defaulting witness, which would have less extreme connotations than the word "hostile". But whether "adverse" portrays a mental attitude as moderate as that implied by the word "unfavourable" at the lower end of the scale or as inordinate as that indicated by the word "hostile" at the upper level or whether it denotes a condition of mind midway between these two extremes, the crucial question is whether the trial Judge, when addressing himself to the task of deciding the point at issue should consider as evidence relevant and material to the subject of inquiry implicit in the terms of the statute, the alleged inconsistent statement attributed to the witness.