New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1849-03-15
Court of Common Pleas.

The following are extracts from the charge oil
Judge DAILY in the sus by Charles Deylin against the
proprie,ors of this paper for alleged libel Want OF
room prevents our giving the charge entire
The Judge after stating that the article having been
admitted to be published, and no attempts made at jus
thcston Observed that under these circumstances the
article deemed 10 be beous that the law presumed
that the plaintiff had sustained injury BY the publication
and that the only queste 10 the was how much he
entitled 10 recover. That where party had been
beled the law presumed that the natural effect OF the
defamation would be Injurious 10 nfn, and would not
require him 20 show that be- bad sustained any special
or particular damage. That he entitled 70 recoy
damages matter Of course, and that 10 liking the
amount Of them two things we're TO be taken into con
sderati0n by tho Jury J. The extent ot the injury
which the plaintiff had received and .. The motive
which had Induced the publication. .
When the charge s Of very serious nature az 20 Inn.
pute 70 an individual high crime, the injury 10 Of
greater than where lighter offence Is Imputed
The Jury, after determining
the OF the injury recsived by the plaintiff were
then 70 consider whether the defendants had published
II from malicious motives and II they had the damages
should be enhanced accordingly Where libel was
published maize presumed but In this sense nal
Ice wss mere technical term, and simply implied an
sctdOne wropgfuly and Intentionally without Just cause
or excuse publication may De wroDg
fol without having proceeded from actual malice, and
II for the Juryto say whether the article In qaes
ron mad been published from actual malice not
That actual malice could be inferred. whore To-
diydual had fairly aud conscientousy performed biz
part any transaction arising out Of the ordinary bust
ness Of life II could be presgmed only when he dew
sled for nsleyoent purposes eyincing malice AZ near
guilty disregard OF the feelings or interests d
| others But the Judge re-
marked be nothing 10 the case 70 warrant toe Ia
ference that Messrs Greeley McElrsth had been 10
i1enced By malicious motives IN the In which b.
had dehoed them The publication inserted b,
the Police Reporter In the paper IS an Item Of news
and there was nothing b show that either he the
bad any III will % the plaintiff, or any mslevolen
motive IN the publication. IL had now become
general practice for the daily papers to publish what
ever uAnspfes before the criminal sgis;sie. IL
practice upon the propriety improperly Of whic
much might be said both sides Ii frequently led
the detection OF criminals 10 the obtaining Of proa
Tor their conviction Wnile IN the of unfOunde
comp aints u gave widespread notorety u the accU
saion, from the nIgriou. effects Of which innocen
| person could not always escape.
| The defendants hsd published the article matt
Of daily Police news under their head II City Items.
and there foundation for doing II, inasmuc
as complaint had been made against the pisintii 10
| libel But there IL nOtoin
b show that IL was done msevocutly. The PUB 81
ers Of Newspaper, If they have any right To Paoh'
preliminary proceedings before magistrates are ooun
10 publish them truly 80 10 this case the Defendant
are liable TO the plaintiff for the injury ne has SUI
tsred by TIE mistake of their reporter 10 saying u
had been madel bat beyond that De 50" notnin
| In the 10 warrant exemplary damages
The Jury retired for lew moments, and gaze q vel
dict for plaintiff for sr eeHs