The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-12-16
Court or Com mon Pleas.

Dro. 49,. Assault and Battery. Frederick Saunders
vs. Moses g. Beach.-This suit which Is collateral to
pending for the recovery Of sum OF between three
and four thousand dollars for alleged breach Of
tract II action for ault and battery brought by
ass,paant Who q. ons Of tbs rronrsto,. ~ tbs Sun
neSspaper and IL stated on behalf Of MIR Saunders
that time in the month Of February ls49 the de-
PENDANT and bis copsrtner. engaged the plaintiff for
three years. as an assistant editor at salary Of $1,000
for the fret year 500 for the second and 81 400 for
the tbhd year. On the first Of March following, the
plaintiff entered upon his duties when the agreement
nrst made between them, the defendants contem-
pstsd publishing additional newspaper, but from
circumstances unknown to the plaintiff they subse-
qusDtly determined to abandon that project this de-
tsmustos rendering the services Of the plaintiff
crssry the defendant ard his co partner set about
devting to induce the plaintiff to abandon his
contract. tutjectiug bin to many petty annoysnces
and insults to attain their purpose aud finally refused
TO continue him In their employ meDt unless he went
abroad to an unhealthy climate, or condescended 20
cell ncvfrspers Ia the store TO persons who should
come In 60 purchase them The plaintiff objected to
that Kind employment and the defendant refused to
pay him the con pepsation stipulated for in their
sgr,ment plaintiff was In the habit of presenting him
self weesy for the purpose Of receiving his salary
the fth a July 1879 h. accordingly called upon the
20 for the amount OF b. salary upon which the defen
dsnt in the presence of large number Of new
into violent rage without the slightest notice or pre-
vious request 70 him to leave the store; forciby took
bod OF the plaintiff and with violence thrust him into
the public street which caused large crowd Of per-
sons 10 collect. The defendant contendei that Mr.
Saunders came upon bis premises and unlaWfully IN
truded behind the counter that he requested him to
ssTart which be refused vhsreupon defendant gently
laid his hand upon plaintiff 20 remove bin One Wit
for the plaintiff, and several for the defendant
examined, Who proved the expulsion Of Sir Saun
dsrs from the sun Office by MIR Beach those for the
defence coDending that violence used, and that
MIR Beach merely laid his hand upon the psintid Tor
the purpose ~ removing him from the pre- misses
Judge DAILY addressed the jury. clearly defining the
lav a assault aud battery and shosiDg the limits TO
the degree Of force necessary legally to be used for the
removal Of n person. II he were intruder upon
smsns house, There conflict in the testimony
one cass f witnesses terrifying that there was no force
used ny the defendant and the witness for the plain
till that thtre unnecessary degree Of violence
u " fer the jury 10 ssy which they thought had tbs
better Iortupty Of obssrvir the Transaction. 1.-THE
entry IL not Illegal no individual Is ju,tided In using
violence for the expulsion Of the party which would
subject him 10 the indignity Of having observation At
taced TO the act and he to be held responsible for
such violence IL Is not assumed here that there
any personal injury fnhcted that any personal
given, any blood let flow but the Law does not
that bodily I'M nries must he inflicted before II In
tersres; the wound Of the body may not be deep
wound that TO the mind by the disgrace inflicted By
the contumsly Of such an act. There vas no wound
60 the flesh yet the injury inflicted 10 the feelings may
have been deep The law intereres not only for the
Of individuals from person injury but for
the purpose Of avoiding the results that offence Of
the Kind may lead to After some further observa-
tiops the nature 81 the case, and perspicuous
position % the law In reference thereto the learned
Judge directed that sealed verdict should be delivered
to the Court on Monday merning.