The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-01-13
Superior Court.
before Chief Justice Oakley ]

BEFORE Cnef JuGglC0 Oehi0y
y Jazz IL --Johs TAompsoa rps Apsss Y. Beech ct a.
5, s that I. passh..ss The
Newspaper, In which the libel 10 ooptained II tho
counter Of deiendsnts ofaos in Fulton street. Alder
cEllrath proved that defsndAnts were proprie-
circulation Mr. Coleman formerly agent of the Ame-
rcsn Bank. proved that he had . conversation With
Mr. Besenin 70 an s.ssS Which ,ppesrsS In
witness asked bis motive for attacking the bank He
said It not through any hostility to witness the
hank, but to resch Thompson, a he could not reach
him in any other way but through his business CON
neotion He at the same time said he haA an engine
it 7 would wither an, thing il touched
Cross. eronired-Q Ia It not plaintiffs habit to
eeivr black mail for reporting banks ssod' nodr
PLsirrIrr,s Coursrr-It Is obvious Why the defsn-
dants counsel have not come into court They sent
they ware here would not ana dare not, make. They
have put cord the pes of the general ssus and
those random offers cannot be let In under It; If they
could the plaintiff would gladly go into them to show
how gronndlsss they are They may attack tho gene
raj character Of Mr. Thompson; y is open to them,
and they welcome to into it, but under the
plea OF the general issue it would be mistral II they
we're allowed to take this course. ed ,L5ag rf. Ia
CHEF JpsTIcE They may attack his general char.
acter ofhonor but they cannot go into black
Q.-Hays you read the plaintiffs Bank Note Reporter,
Objected to, the ground that IL IL NO mitigation
Of the present libel to show that the plaintiff bsed
the defendant; cannot be given In evidence here,
except whore the adverse publcston we: immedstely
pre- the libel Of Question overrued
defendants counsel offers to prove various hbes 10
the Bank Note Reporter for the years 1874 1896 1sAe
and 1847, ON the proprietors Of the New York Sun
obected to, and objection allowed, on the ground Of
dapts' counsel opened the defe noe. He commenced
by stating that he never before felt embarrassed
It unft runately happened that Messrs Beachb lead
trial in other courts ard they could not them
and the defence Of this important
Ss o. jury would
member with what acity his adversares had push
ed 1t on, which would show the vindictvs feeling BY
which the plaintiff actuated in the prosecution Of
this action, and that not to repair any Injury
his character had sustained, but - speculation z
put dollars and cents into his pocket They had, he
ssid It iii times been ready to make any rsparstion
! that MIR. Thompson might require but he Invariably
al Then %sns on
defence to the present suit and that IL had grown
out Of paper war carried on between the parties from
time carried ON confused warfare against the
defsnda nts and their banking establishments, and
they sd to him .gd no
ii. character sustained but to speculate upsn heavy
taeks made defendants in the Bank Note Reporter
Of which plaintiff % editor, during the year 1s41
next examned-In August lS47, be remembers the u.
legged lte ON plaintiffs It was written by witness no
- vns. to ~s the
awsre that the dsfendsnts knew anything about IT. It
written the authority Of communication sent
| Cross eromined- Knows the plaintiff very we'll.
To AJuRoR-l have authority to libel in defence o.
Sn but ps
in defence of the editor and Of his property and also
in defence Of the character Of the paper.
CHEF JUsrIcE-Did you publish this libel a. truth
I WIrNEX-1t came In the usual way, and published
Q By THE CouRr-How long have you been an edi
tor Of tho Sun Newspaper, since the publication ofth
A. am an editor asout six years oaI 1'11ao
G Have you ever consulted with the dsfendAnti
since and did they express any dissatisfaction at it
A. We consulted about it. and We were ell very sorry
for Il, but was not dismissed The younger members
a,% IRE t n: en- Gs .s IT,
defendants counsel summed up was nearly recap.
tulstion Of his opening With additional
calmly and without any prejudice against the defend
calmly than my young friend and At least With squ.
dignity, and without casting one half the odium on
t that :: sss on the
suit upon ipjury; but here let me remark upon tn
beautiful rrse played on BY my young friend and hi
ocquettipg between the defendans council every day
during the week that this trial had been called on
Blunt ,Uua Il and * G1
the latter would come In the next but he would no,
venture to try It without Mr.. Cuttingi and Me- Cut
|
- u. the is.s rose Of summer lef. blooming alone Or
Geptlemsn q the jury the truth IT, the parties neve,
intended to bring to try this case, but t.
.ba ssr o. On you
! knew they bad NO defence to make, and they
wisely retired ON the hsd leaving my youI e
done than ali Of them put together would Or could
which they themselves would not dare to do: wnl
now proceed to take up tho case calmly; and nrst,
which bss opened to me new light on this subject;
and believe ssnassn;sn may .da that til; light has
and have doubt but what he states is true that he
has licepse to libel the community, can only say
his paper and himself public nuisance Gentle
tie libel complain off, stating that MI. Thomp-
son was guilty Of State prison offence now II this
be the province Of the sun newspaper repeat that
will new a.k you to read these young gentle
men, who about to comme their in lfe
valuable to them for the remainder Of their lives than
| the $1,000 verdict which Jon may give to my
client Here let me remark that | have no ami.
thing rent to the paper, without any inquiry having
commupity, hold our reputation BY . very slender
thread indeed. Gentlemen, you ob.srysd the line O
BY 'qns .ous no
cspted and were only intended to hssp Islander upor
SANDER. Mr. Thompson would have gladly given hin
opportunity Of going into these proofs but hi
council knew they only intended to put this tla
of for another month, to escape your verdict. And
striker me- cure It must strike that the whole
of thofe oerp well the evidence that has beer
given for the defendants on this trial Is aggrsvs
ton, and not pallation, Of this offence: Gentlemen
ask, do you, or can believe the defendants did
| net see or know this libel was published DO you
think Edie would dare to publish such libel on re-
spectacle citiEenf Can you for moment suppose hi
would compose and publish such libel without tbs
| copst Mt and authority Of Mr. Beach, The idea thai
he dare DO euch thing 10 too absurd the fact Of hi
still being In the employmen Of the defendsnts. put
that after beyond doubt II ever there any doub
abouti 10. Gentlemen let me now call your attention
to the evidence OF Mr.. Coleman lie stated that Beael
told him that he had NO enmty to him Coleman ~ Blu
that wanted to touch Thompson through bushes
relations, and that he could only At him In tina
wsy he told Coleman that he had an engine tina
| would drive Thompson out Of the city and withe
every thing n touched. Until heard this evidence
| did not think MT Beach could have the hardihoot
tosay that he would drive John Thompson out of thi
city with the mark Of Cain on his forehead. Gentle
men after this evidence, ask you, can you belev,
that MIR Beach his SONS did not see this article OF