Democratic standard. [volume] (Georgetown, Brown County, Ohio) 1837-1850, 1843-10-10
From the Ohio Statesman
PUBLIC MEETING.

PUBLIC MEEElNG.
A large and enthusiastic meeting was
held at the Union Hotel, in the city Of
Columbus, on the 2Sth of September,
lS43, to take into consideration the sub
iect Of the extraordinary verdict render
ed in the Court Of Common Pleas of this
county, this day, against Col. Medary,
Editor of the Ohio Statesman.
The meeting was called to order BY ap-
pointing Gen. W. F. SANDERSON,
President, SAMUEL WILSON, Vice Presi-
dent and d. B. White Secretary.
The object of the meeting having been
briefly stated,
On motion, committee Of seven was
appointed to draft resolutions expressive
of the sense oe ibis meeting; when the
following gentlemen were selected; DR..
Trevitt. s. D. Preston, E. Gale, j. Rine-
hart, f. Gaver, G. W. Slocum and John
Walton.
The committee, after having retired
for a short time, returned and reported
the following resolutions, which were
unanimously adopted:
RESOLVED, That it is with feelings OF
astonshment and strong indignation that
we have heard the enormous verdict OF
TWO THOUsAND DOLLARS, this day pro-
nounced in the Court Of Common Pleas,
against the Editor Of the Ohio Statesman,
for an alleged libel upon Dsmas Adams,
contained in communication over the
sicnature of 'sMartin Luther which
was inserted in the Statesman of May 9th,
1910.
REsoLvED, That, as we have charity
for the conscience Of men when blinded
nv excited party prejudice, we will not
for a single moment impute corrupt mos
tives 10 the twelve jurors who gave the
verdict, but in view Of the cause upon
which ii was founded, and Of the extraor
ninsry circumstances attendant upon tht
selection Of the Jury, we do not hesitate
"a sav that, 10 our minds, It seems mos
palpably unjust and oppressive:
REsoLvED, That, in order 10 justify ou
opinion before each candid mind through
out thu country, we state these facts
which we're made known, and not con
tsadicted, upon the trial Of the case
l. That u the time Of the pObliCatio
oF the communication upon which tn
anil was brought, Col. Medary was som
Ave hundred miles distant, and kns'
nothing OF il until his srrival at hom'
some three weeks alter its Publica
tiOn. :.
D. That, Immediately upon his II
turn. he authorized N. H. Swayne, h
counsel 10 say 10 Mr. Adams, that.
he had been at home, the article wou
NOT have been published.
Tha, consultation was held
the counsel Of the parties, yhen it w
agreed that if he (Medary) would gi'
IN the name of the author, and agree
make retraxit, the suit would be will
drawn--which agreement was fully al
honorabIy complied with by Col. MedaI
~ giving up the name ofthe author,a
nsoGarinr statement TetFacting all tt
haA baen said 10 the communication
oainSt the character Of Adams, but A
Ans would NOT, as agreed, dismiss his 9
and therefore the retraction was ne'
published. s...;,.
name ofthe author, be (Adams) manIt
M 4 determination to resist any homo
ble compremlse, (having been mlsla'
in hls supposition Of the person OF the
anlhor.)
That after having succeeded
forcing On the trial in the absencs Of
defendant, in advance Of all other o.
ness, and the jury having been lmII
nelIed, II was found that there were
ofths regular Jury absent, whereupon
whiQ Sheriff selected from the court I
suiicient number Of men, all OF "
we're whigs-the defendants coRsel
iectsd Two OF, whose places we're .
filled BY whigs-- -thng having an q
whigiufy, six of whom we're calie'
the whig Sheriff and his deputy.
RESOLVED, That, in Col Medary's
sence, he could not have been
ally culpable for the publc
= ag,s... !, ! - ls..v.s s.f i Vuhil