New-York daily tribune., 1844-11-30

ter that al he anted mt he naa e.el IRON
ssspf be- be Saa said ha the man hand
& y he Ind seea the statement abou, Mary Roger,
s .. 4Sssi 4sSs eau,e % not with DIS ir9l
prteI am blacksmith by trade MI i.n Forge did not
S he ~ .er from Mr. Crommen to Mr. La Forge ,hc,
NEw- YORK, is Pine street, July 81, ls4i.
eoo "a Forge S Tbs morning you mrde "a charge
es Justice the CITY and County Of New York. which
o he purpose TO inurc my reputation The precise words
y"s ysn who can spbanate assertion presume you will
to ssSs on paper fEED nf ken
s,s no snws5 ". Tc s,se
s;r. Wilson, counsel on behalf OF Mr. La Forge,
hon ocne fo the defence lie stated that the declaration d
he aa witness that Mr.. H. said he had what he rad
srnhsrrasent 1t known that much said in the
munty time hr La Forge is rsugh tdweIkids
nsss and remarked what he did on hearing Mr. c. testify.
@ on he s r:s @ se possa o
ssai exalted terms, mostly with view to create SYM
s5 s spes Of e. sc O Su1 M takes
Won by the hand, md out of office seeming
sS goes nD
something which stabs and brhs rcputatonyou see
At Al your own esde for you know not whence the blow
eoines-nark that individual, and visit him with your
lowed, to show circumstances III exrcnuatlon.
Isaac C0cSttair sworn.-know MIR. Crommelr !;
ths
tps Sey title abou, the Mary Rogers case now saw N
Cronmeln at that time IN my 3ttcin! cnpaey Mr. Brady
%on sand he was prepared to show that Mr. CcckeiaI tho
/, Police officer had arrested Mr.. G. during the InyeGa
iecied He Ind given PERMISSION in his opening: he said
that the defendant he considered hnse'i able TO do
C. Rogers had stolen old clothes. He could not allow lis
| M o. whed able to sh"w acs IN mitigation The
Court ruled that having charged Mr. Z. with the murder OF
Nj IN asked the witness N had called Mr. T.
10 his official capacity Nnesi called upon hlm officially
gam objected as came within the nie Mr. Wilson asked
he Court he could show that the witness had called Mr.
and examined him ii, he satisfied that Mr.. c.
pcaieG. and discharged him. The Court remarked TINT
Sesolds be's @ Charged the testimony could not be adme
Nm. b. Sterling sworn.--is. and was last July,
one OF The Assistant, Justices Of the City Of NewY York Re-
collect the case the Corporation in which Mr. la Forge
concerned Iecolect Mr being w!,aess IN some case
suit OF his having mnde any charge against Mr. C. us To-
Mary Rogers or OF any particular interruption recoec OF
witness My recollection good that OF persons gen.
eay. haye pdstlnct recollection oil some charge hqv
whom do not recollect heard the name mentioned
where in Court but do not remember whut.
have 10 so Corporation before
day sometimes, and pny attention to my notes
than TO the witnesses recoect the plaintiff only from his
peculiar mode of speech
MI Wilson inquired Of Mr. Brady hCw ia, he would per permit
must 60 on and prove the assertions be t.ac he could
mr.. C0ckrfGr recalled The witness was asked
fbe waited Mr. C. in relation to the clothes. but MI Bra
dy would allow the unless Mr. w, would attempt
prove, within the legal rules of evidence that Mr. C. had
stolen them. The wess was Withdrawn and the case on
both sides. rested Justice Taylor and number OF Of
fces in attendance witnesses. not having been called
MIR. Wilson Ihen summed up on The part oil de-
ienlant, and was replied to by Mr.. Brady.
The Court charged that OF Slunder the defendant IS
permitted TO plead truth Justltcaon but IN order to DO SO ne
give notice plaintiff OF such nenOn il he fails
give such notice. he cqnno. either BY positive proe BY
snuution. attempt Justification defendant however, Is at
liberty to present before ury the Character of pl4nh TO
show whether That character valuable hn or has been
thrown by his own acts. and worthless 80 piant
liberty present evidence OF his good chaIncer SO
TINT the damages may be considered n relation
There direct charges i'll this cuse, either oil
which, proved, is sufficient 10 sustain the acton ana from
the testimony of the first witness must be considered tnn
they have been proved and hat the words charged were
spoken Had the defendant stated that MIR. Crommen had
been arrested he would haye been enabled to give proof OF
ever hard might be plaintiff, the Supreme Court has re-
Gently decided that truth must be paramount to all uter con-
sideations. As to the present the character ol Mr.
Crommein stands before this Court good and unmpeached
and If the Jury thinks, with the Court, that the words mud
ally been spoken they will find such dumngas they
fit. Verdict this forenoon
William Lynch VS.. Ebenezsr Welsh.-Action to
recover 81 9 49, balance of special cognovt Judgment
referred yesterday The Jury returned sealed verdict IN
favor of plaintiff for cents damages and cents costs