The New York herald., 1844-10-26
Common Pleas.

OcT IS Joseph Nc Murray VS.. Stephen E. GIoper.-Li
for libel and SANDER The case wa. opened last evening
but examined, and occupied the court
during the day. The libel charged, was contained in
cautionary letters which had been sem liverpool
one addressedt to Mrs. Byrnes the widow Of the late
TW shipping agent at Livernoo and the other
in the suit were formerly partners il the shipping
line and held connexion with Mr. Byrnes formal
dissolution took place between them when the plaintiff
still continued the cOnnexion with the late Mr. Byrnes
On is demise it alleged the defendant forwarded the
letters can,ionng Mrs Byrnes to beware Of the plain
tiff for he designing man" and went on to charge
upon him other acts relation to his general character
which reflected with much bitterness fsnd malice upon
the character OF the defendant The second letter was Of
similar import but not strong against MIR McMurray
Mr. LOGAN the first witness, testified that about eight
years ago he became acquainted with the aes in the
sDashsr partner P'ss %ho died II the late @ Mr.
Hyres connected with them, and kept his house at
fsndant became partners the late Mr. Byrnss continued
be the principal correspondent and they had large
commercial dealings: in september ls42, dissolution
took place defendant continued in business on his own
account and witness remained in his employ witness
handed letter by defendant to copy he copied and
bellous letter defendant pvt the letter in his desk for
time, and then handed to witness to be forwarded
to Mrs Byrnes Witness testified to having put both let
ters the time to be forwarded by the steamer. and
copied them in the way In his cross-examinaton
this witness stated he took copy of the letter. and
was induced to mention it. lest Mr. McMurray should
suppose he was an accessory to the LIBEL and mpcae
",
Mr. BUNKER merchant of this city, testified to having
been engaged in settling some accounts after dssou
ton Of the firm Of Rawson and McMurray, which he had
arranged.
Mr. CurTIre for defendant. conended that libel
that the rwarding Of letter did not
publication ard that proof detective in relation to
the letter
Mr. Murocx con,ended that the moment q sanderous
duly forwarded, it amounted to publication, az it
went before the world the public being liable 10 receive
49,.
calculated to make. He conended that upon high
authority il amounted to publication in the case before
the Court the peculiar features of which brought with
in the exact limits Of the statute
The Court charged that sending letter did not amount
to publications. but i the jury were satisfied as 10 the
verdict for plaintiff and find damages-not virdictive
damages but damages to the amount of the injury
tanned by the plaintiff The jury will render sealed
swarton vs. Brernan-In this case noticed in yester.
days Herald the Jury rendered sealed verdict tor de
fendant.
Common PIeas-In Chambers.
Ocr. 25 5-Henry Coulter Us Thomas Mc.dddm.-ln this
which has been already noticed in the Herald bein
10 4bnss fo% for pes the
who is respectable merchant in this city has commen-
ced an scton for libel and slander lme dealings took
place between the parties in relation to the sale OF lum
ber pianos sc When Coulter had the defendant arrest
ed and the was brought before Judge Ulshosfer
the following facts were then put in evidence
First the defendant produced number OF Witnesses
principally merchants who had had dealings with Cou
with view to impeach his Character, which they
alleged bad and that they would not believe him
under oath.
The defendant then introduced the Hon. Judge Drnker
who stated that the property claimed in this proceeding
by Coulter belonged TO and the property OF one VIM
Brenisen, O New York mechanic in this city. That
he know this from Coulter HIMSELF and from his intimacy
with the facts in the That he had furnished McAdan
with bond of indemnity against the claim OF Coulter
and agent and counsel for the owner forbid McAdan
pay Coulter at all hazards That the suretes tbs
bond Of indemnity good men and able to respond
to sny amount Coulter might recover, il he should
cover. VIM Drenisen then introduced who stated
that he owned the pianos for which this suit brought
that Coulter had right to them whatever and that t
had commenced SUIT for the property to test h
ttle and that that suit still pending Emery Town
send also produced Brensen attorney who statet
the same facts
The complainant then introduced receipt from Brent
sen showing that Brensen had been paid by Coulter fol
the pianos This was introduced after Brsnisen hat
left defendants counsel eontended they should have
time to find Brenisen to explain the receipt the Judge
stated that had occupied too much time TO admit
Of further delay.
The complainant further proved by two witnessei
who had been in Mr.. McAdams employ, that he wa,
worth SLOGAN that he had gold watch gold spectaces
and more, q diamond br ast pm.
The then submitted, when the Judge decided
that the receipt of Brensen showed that Coulter had
right to in this case and McAdam was mar
Of large property he must or give bond under thu
statute to pay assign in thirty days. which was done