New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1842-12-12

ence of witnesses, must OF course be wrong where
it differed from Mr. Cooper's own maturer state
ment, and all differences founded on such points II
the former account fell of course Ii did not occur
to us that any body could think differently from
this, and we supposed there was nothing more &c
be said in the premises. All did say, therefore
was in substance that, taking Mr.. C.'s own &C
count of the facts, his conduct had not been what
we considered honorable and magnenimous. Who
could suppose that we meant (sse the article quo
ted in our Defence, to dtscredit and express our
dis5eletn Mr.. Cooper's account of his own acts
Yet Mr.. c. did suppose it-at least, he pat the
whole case in that ligh, to the Jury strongly as
he could and-alas for US the Judge took the
same view of the matter, and that foored US.
LIE. US be carefully just to Mr.. Cooper: One
expression in our own article of Nov so, push
ing his case to a default the first and then on
the second day Of the term, does give bare color
&c his representation and if this were the whole
article, might afford it some Justification What
we meant to imply was that he appeared and de-
cIared himself ready to try the case on the first
day of the term, though, when appealed TO, ne
q w
pushing his case trial in his opponents absence
with sixty wolf power he could do no more than
wait till ii was called in its order by the clerk,
and then say, with the sweetest of smiles and
bow to the Judge, Ready on the part of The
plaintiff, sir and simply stand there. If any
body knows how to push case harder than this,
they may teach US the art if they do Mt charge
too much for the tuition.
But, considering that correspondent had
been quite wrong in his hearsay statement on this
very point we ought to have used different word
or phrase in this connection; and so we should if
we had supposed the idea adopted by Mr.. Coop
err 10 w.t. that we discredited his statements fact
could possibly occur to any one. But taking the
other view, viz. that his facts qualified our own
language used in connection with them, sup
posed every body understood that we could mean
only by the phrase so msapplied by MIR. Cooper
that he was ready and willing go trial on the
first day of the term in Mr.. Weeds absence,
though upon remoustrance he desisted; and that
he did go to trial the second day under those pre-
else circumstances. If we had supposed Cooper
could sue US after we had published his own state
ment we should have been more precise and
guarded than we were But are sure nobody
understood us as saying that he absolutely pushed
his case trial the first day, and then the second
day over again. Mr.. c. is q strange man in some
respects, but we never meant to accuse kim of
working miracles.
But, in order to show beyond cavil that the con-
struction placed by Fonimore and His Honor on
our expression of Nov. 30tf and its purpose is
wrong, we COPY from The Tribune of Noo. 29tA,
l84l. 1.-THE very day before the article so mscon-
strued appeared in our celamns,) an Editorial,
which appeared directly under our Editorial bead,
and in our next Weekly directly over the article of
Nov. 3Oth 1t is word for word as follows:
"a7 Mr. j. Kenmore COOPER informs the public through
be commenced against tie Editors, Publishers &c OF the
Tribune and Evening Journal So we are 70 eaten II 10,
be ale Circuit held there in the Feninore
Cooper u.s. Thurow Weed aud the People oil New ioIk rs
I, a,sou Webb. Precisely what we have done TO In
cnr he mains and penalties of the law do not UNDER
stand but we doubtless shall when the Sheriff clutches and
Mr. j. Feniu9ore Cooper rains down upon us MI y. tes
The story at greater length and puts excuses for
his driving h)s own suit to verdict oy aean
from Mr. he compelled 10 get out OF The cars
TO attend bedside oa dying daughter and would oe
the next day but do not perceive that ne conaoet
onr CORE, pondent any essential point AT all events
having published the letter excepted to as ausr OF hle.
Ioance without any of feeling toward Mr. cooper Dut
NH a. his conduct in the seemed to excite we have at
all times stood ready publish cheerny any
contradiction be choose 10 send u.s. he chooses 10
scnd none bu, sn for libel instead So be II, then
Walk in Mr.. Sheriff ,...,, ~:
There n one comfort TO u.s. under this terrible dis
nana,jon Mr. Cooper will have bring his action to trial
some.phere He will not like to bring in New York Tor
known here nor in oseg9 ot nc Is IL en
eomery Uous in Sis tate defeat by Gel Webb That
mi IN
trial AMI good deveraDce before any AMERICAN jury
So MIR. Bingham fetch On your bears .
Will any man say after this that actually
meant, in our article of Nov. Both, to charge Mr..
Cooper with positively insisting on going to trial
on the first day of The term
One word more about all this pushing, and we
push out of it, Richard, Kenmore and His Honor
Gf we mistake not, each in turn dwelt on the
enormty of our correspondent mistake with re-
gard to Mr. IS ultimate course ON the hrst day.
assumed, errngly, that we meant to persist IN IN
stead of correcting that mistake, and thereuPon
represented us as holding up the plaintiff to odium
as monster of inhumanity, &c. &c. Now we
don't concur in all this-we here express no opiii-
ion on Mr. C.'s course in all that matter--but we
do say that If it rould hare been so helsous to IN
sjst ON a trial the first day, we cannot see that IL
was much better to insist just 50 on the second
dav, in view Of Mr.. Weeds affections. That Is
about what we meant in article of Nov 3oth'
whereon the second count in the Declaration
against us based.
Mr.. C. was wrong in attempting to show that
our articles alleged hbes were reflections on the
Court-but as His Honor set that right, and 1t had
netting TO do with the issue to be tried, we let II
pass. IF we had libeled the Court, that should