Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1838-05-01

SEcoss WARD CsuRr-Before Justice KirtIand.-
Bennett versus Butler.
This was an amusing case. The plaintiff engaged
the defendant TO carve wood-cut TO illustrate
ticle that appeared in the New York Herald called
the Loafer and Loeofoce Meeting in the Park"
The morning this article appeared, young gen.
to illustrate the written of the meeting. This
sketch Mr.. Bennett handed 10 Mr. Butler, the wood
engraver, to carve wood cut for him by the follow
ing Saturday, when the article was to be republished
in the weekly paper.
Mr.. Butler said he could net do il by Saturday,
therefore Mr. Bennett deferred the publication of the
article till the Saturday following, about eleven days
altogether Early on the following week he was put
by Friday noon. He failed to dc this he then en-
gagged TO have it engraved by Friday at4 p. nj. He
failed TO do this, and then promised to have it done
by on Friday evening. He failed to do this, and
came in the evening say So when Mr.. Bennett told
him il would then be of no use.
The first witness examined was William A. Fran
cis He stated that Mr. Butler came 10 the Office on
Friday about s, and said he could not get the cut
done ill midnight. This was told to Mr.. Bennett
who replied that then the cut would be Of no use
Witness estimated the loss from not having the cut
at $40 Ii would have been possible to have pat the
cut in the paper if il had been done by midnight; but
that would have caused considerable inconvenience to
the workmeH Of the establishment and an additional
expense that expense would not have been near $40
He saw Mr.. Butler on the next Saturday morning
he had not then finished the wood lieut. witness told
him. and Mr. Bennett also told him that Mr. B. want
ed TO have the cut done in time for Mondays paper
Butler replied hat Mr., Bennett should not then have
the wooden nj any price. He said he could not let
him have il then because he had made some arrange.
mens to dispose Of IT, or had actually sold it, to
other paper. Witness saw the wood-cst IN the Sun
day Morning News the next day.
William III. Attree examncd-Is reporter for the
Herald Wrote the article in question preparatory
10 the account OF the "Loafer Meeting" Mr..
Blocker drew the sketch TO illustrate IL and Mr..
4 IL Il "a
anxious to have the sketch carved and published,
and took considerable pains TO that effect; delay
ed the article one week TO accommodate Mr.. But
Ter. IL was twice promised and not done. The
ON Mr.. Butler 10 expedite it. On Friday evening Mr..
Butler called and told Mr.. Bennett he could not get
IL done till a late hour in the night Mr.. Ii. said II
was Of no use. Mr.. Bennett is very precise and re-
gular never leaves any one else 10 attend to any
thing which he can see 10 himself; he always super
intends the making up Of his paper to the minuiest
details He gives directions concerning every depart
ment and then personally that these directions
are followed up The cut could have been inserted at
midnight but IL would have deranged the usual order
of things Mr.. Bennett, secs TO the arrangements Of
the weekly paper and regularly retres TO bed NJ 10 al
night. When Mr. B. told Butler the cut would be OF
no after 8 or 9 that night, Butler said he could
not afford TO lose his time and labor Mr.. b told him
his loss would be his own fault, owing to his not
fulfilling his contract Mr.. Butler said boot, max or
was able to tell exactly when he could finish piece
Of work, but wood ensraver could not-he was not
q boot.msker. Mr.. b. replied :" ! am a boei- ma
ker, you are boot maker Shakespeare was a boot
maker we're all boo-makers 90 far as being Obliged TO
work for livelihood, and keep premise" Butler
said, "then III sell the wood cut 10 the Sunday Mors-
| ing News, dare say Mr.. Smith will give me some
thing for IT," Mr.. Bennett said If ron sell u 10 any
one III bring action against you, for it's my pro.
perry" Defendant then went away The WOOD cu'
appeared in the Sunday Morning News, next Sunday
with Buffers name on il.
This was the jet Of the evidence. John A. Nor,
rill for plaintiff conducted the case with grca, ssn
and elected much mIrth. Mr.. Barnet for the defence
ed ill IL at night The Judge said that as Mr. Bat.
Ter did not fulfil his first agreement ne hss no neh
10 expect Mr. Bennett to cit mp for the cat I'LL an IN
reasonable hour and IL o'clock was an uureasona-
Judgement IL 10 be pronounced on Thursday, when
we shall give further particulars.