The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1842-01-05
COust Of Com mon Pleas.
Before Judge Ulshoe fer.

JAN A. Thomas Coles VS.. W. d. Coolidge This
was an action for SANDER, the damages laid at
SlOOO
DAVID GRAHAM, Esq. in opening the case, stat
ed that the plaintiff a respectable shoe dealer
in the city Of New York, and had transactions with
the defendant, shoe mercha residing at Bostsn.
MIR. Coles had been unfortunate in business. Mr.
Coolidge gave ost that he was a rogue, cheat.
and swindler, and he could send him to the State
Prison. Mr. Coles had been injured by the re-
marks, and now sought reparation.
Mr. PETER V. TILYoU sworn-Kept in bis ia
tha,'s store, that Of Mr.. John ID. Tyou, in Chatham
street; some time in January, 1910, Mr.. Coolidge
and Mr.. Coles we're in our store; considerable con-
versation took place between them Mr.. Coles
was calm, but Mir. Coolidge little Angry; the lat
ter said, in ausion to some business beiwet them.
that il as swindling traRsaction-that Mr.. Coles
was a swindlcr, and had swindled him out Of his
goods and he was able TO prove it, and could send
him to he State Prison.
Mr.. JOHN GAYNoR was then called-Kept in Mr.
Tilyou's store and heard the conversation alluded
to by the last witness.
Mr. GRAHAM, in further proof Of Mr. Coolidge's
position in regard to Mr. Coles, read the following
letter -
Mn. THo,. CoLx,-
of the 9Th inst is received but too late to pre-
vent putting friends in New York TO additional
trouble my account You soy II have any PROPOSE
ton make, to DO definitely, and you win
Wrote you in my last that, with you, SHOULD have
II Mr. Tilyou will undertake TO negotiate betw cea as,
with him will confer. consider him gen,lsm an and
an amicabe arrangement With regard 10 he
you hear may be The State OF New York versus
Coles Howe else a requistion from this state for
obtaining goods under false PretenCes. / no. TO be
Yours, &c. w. D. COOLIDGE.
Boston, Feb IL, 1910.
Mr. N. B BLusr, for defendant, then moved q
nonsuit, on the ground that the words complained
of were spoken to the defendant himself and not
10 third parties and the letter had been written to
the defendant personally. He contendod that no
SANDER, in consequence, had teen proved The
Court, however, overrulcd the objection, Saying
that sufficient had been proved to go tc The Jury
Mr. BLUNT then opened for the defence and con-
tended that in producing the letter the counsel Tor
plaintiff had brought himself within the rules
He had presented charges other than those eon-
tanned ia the declaration, which gave the defence
an opportunity Of going into justification
This was denied By Mr. GRAHAM, who remark
ed that the letter was merely in proof Of the de-
e,aratiop and that the counsel must conGne his
evidence TO the specific charge.
The Cousr observed that the letter contained
charges Of felony, averring that the plaintiff was
liable to a or mnal action, and had been guilty of
obtaining goods under false pretenccs. So far he
counsel was at liberty TO bring jusiifyng prooi,brt
not beyond that point
Messrs. TrLYoU and GAyHoR were again placed
upon the stand, but nothing additional was elicit
SAMUEL HOWE sworn.-Was ono OF the firm
kept shoe store at so Liberty street, corner Of
Green; stopped payment in June or July, 1851;
Mr. Coles then took store No. li2 Chatham street,
and we removed 70 it: we owed Mr. Coolidge be-
two $500 and SlG0O fer boots and shoes the laat
we received from HIM was the day before or the
sane day that we stopped payment; the bill
amounted to $500 or 500; on the previous Satur-
day witness gave the order personally, on board
the steamboat, to MIR. Coolidge, as the latter was
starting for Boston, and requested that the boots
and shoes should be sent on by Wednesday, az No
were desirsus Of making up order fer the south;
the failure was unexpected; we had goels and pa
per enough on hand Ia pay our debts, with S20,0m
surplus. Mr.. Coolidge came ON again Just as we
had shipped his bill OF shoes, or were about To
ship then; cannot say which; told Mr.. Coolidge
thstsve were scsirons Of filling the southern or
lose no, hing that If we were compelled to make
an assien ment, his debt should be preferred ore
We did assign, Mr.. Tyou (Which gentleman, Mr..
Coles and nnvself brothersinIaw) beIng one of
the assignee hut at first refused TO sign it, a. phi
vs,e debts Of Mr.. Coles were placed In IL, while
debts of the firm that ought "a have been, not
SO. W~Eowed, when we stopped, between So, 0OO
and go 900; the debtstof Mr.. Coolidge was nat
placed among those II preferred creditors; the
prsfe rred debts amounted 10 between $lO, 900 and
Sl2 400, the whole Of which have rot yet hen
paid; actions were sterw instituted by acme
OF ths creditors again the firm and agAnst the 81
sicncss, one of which is now in Chanccry.
The CsuRT charged that the evidence seither
justified in Law the prefsions, or the charges con-
tanned in the letter. The pIartiG was, therefore,
snhtied 90 damages.
A scaled verdict will be bscsgbt in THE force
noon.