The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-02-22

nrm) was handed over to Harris The only fact
not noticed In the report WAS that Clarke a.d Harris
SION was beneficial to the reputation Of the parties.
The report eminently fair Would the jury then,
pocket Of Mr. Bennett. to give to Mr. Clarke! If the
plaintiff had Put articles into the public papers for the
purpose Of impugning the accuracy OF the Herads
ports and thereby bringing 1t into dsrspute with the
public, he must be prepared to take tho
little aspsrty either In law morals, was jusths-
Of the lear Of this State which the plain
til raid had been garbled, they would fnd upon
pairing It With what had appeared in the Herald that
1t was faithful copy OF what given in the book
and there nothing wrong laying before the pub
lie the opinion Of high legal functionsry upon sub.
nifty The view of the learned Chansellor was the
law, and such they would find 1t, the opinion OF
the plaintiff to the contrary Notwithstanding He
the learned counse would repeat that the report
correct report and that the precise form In which 1t
bad appeared before the public was warranted. A
truthful correction bad been made of in Law
into which the plaintiff had fallen aud that he consi-
dered libellous The Law permitted the truth to be
published, however malicious that publication m ight
be- His ellie had not come into court OF his
cord; he had been brought there by the plaintiff 1t
would be fer him ths learned oounse to inquire how
far the plaintiff was q man Of good name, fame and
credit, to ente him to the redress which he pre-
sumptuousy and 80 uni Justly sought at the hands Of
the learned counsel concluded his able address, and
resumed his seat
ned to the proceedings which took place
tss Lothrop The object Of this witnesses testimony
was to show that the report was a fair ons.
said that he of the Police Justices Of this oty
heremembers the complaint in question having bee n
made; it to before him OF the 10th Of June
ls4s; he then issued warrant for the apprehsn sion
OF Clarke who appeared before him. but
out Of custody witness having told him that rs had
not yet made his mind to send the papers before the
grand jury, but told him that he had behaved very
dishonssty In the transaction, if not criminally.
was the next witness He said he lived at rs Park
Place and had been q member Of the legal profession
for the last three years. there was NO business
nection whatever between him and MIR. Galbraith;
witr had invited him to become his associate in the
once part Of the expenses Of which he to pay;
the office belonged to witnesses father DIR. Mott; his
attention was AIst directed to this matter when
Clarke and Harris to the Office to converse with
M GalGrsth about the money Mr.; Galbraith stated
that NJ had no objection to pay but that he wished
to know to whom he was to ray it..
The plaintiffs COUNSEL objected to this line Of evil
had taken place In secret oonclavs but had
place before the pelice justice The question was
The CoURr.-Do you complain Of the Islander!
COUNSEL for dsfendsnt.-Hs clients answer was
CouxsrL for pl intiG Their ground of action wa.
whether the procee dings before the police
correctly reported. The opposite side say they were
He said they not The ubeot of giving garbled
report was to show that the plaintiff had received
money under false pretenoes.
The CoUsr That lays the ground for justicstion
COUNSEL for plaintiff. If his client had obtained
to the prison. that would justify the
copy of the matter charged as iibsous was only re-
Quired to be set FORTH without any svsrment innu
ende He would repeat, the question for the jury
whether correct report Of what had taken place at
the police Office had been given by the dsfe nds. it
had Why then he was justihsd-K not he not JUS
titled.
The CouRr told him that his own commentary upon
his text was against him.
COUNSEL for plaiAtiG.-The complaint wa, made AZ
ter the enactment of the code when neither
nor lawyers were supposed to be acquainted with the
sublime mysteries of that sublime humbus.
The COURT with much earnestness Of manner)-
What says the learned counsel HE must act in q
manner becoming his position. He rebuked him
MIR SANFORD would again state, in reply to the OBJ
jections Of the counsel for the plaintiff that his (Mr
$50 clients answer ustioation and If tn at did
not constitute an issue he (Mr 81 did not know what
did
The CeUnr ruled 1t So
Erantnation resumed-Mr. Galbraith desired Mr..
kennouii's authority to pay the money, when Mr..
(Mr. knew that that was impossible, As Rennouil
VAS well On his way to France nothing more 60
CURED that day witness did not Clarke Harris
until he saw them at the Tomss
The evidence being again objected to by plaintiffs
counsel,
The COUNSEL for defendant raid his object va, to
rebut the allegation made in the opening by the other
side that MIR Bennett had caused the prosec uton
be instituted against Clarke.
Eaanino alton resumed Witness, in the first place,
made a complaint to Justice Lothrop, who had told
him to draw up an aidavit witness did 60 MIR. JUS
tice Lothrop not satisfied IS to the assignment
mentioned in the AFFIDAVIT, In consequence Of which
witness went the next morning Saturday to the Court
Of Sessions stated his case to the Assistant District
AtoI told him tina. al the facts were stated In an
sfidsvit copy Of which he (witne,s, had IN his hand
and that the police justice unwilling to instigste
crmins! proceedings against Mr. Clarke wi ness
wiehed to know he could give authority to proceed
when the Assistant Distriot Attorney took the draft
Of the affidavit, and endorsed upon in 1t the following
We have no doubt that THE Is proper for the
investigation of the police, aud that the complaint
ehoold be entertained. JONAS b. PHILLIPs
Assistant District Attorney.
Witness then went to the police office and the
Wit To Iuat TOfh had had
ton whatever with Mr. Bennett had not seen him at
all had acted as counsel in the proceedings before
the police court Mr.. Galbrath seated the op.
posite side Of the table he (Mr had even sue-
gested question. SO far as witness remembered Mr..
Gabraith had been subpGnaed to attend he had re-
fused to attend without subpoena Mr.. Rennoutl
was native of France witness had oonversed with
him more frequently in French, he understood his
own language better than English witness was not
present when the money was paid
Mr. MoTT was GROSS examined at great length.
JOHN READE was the next witness.
Plaintiffs COUNSEL objected to his being examined as
to the general character Of the plaintiff
The CouRr raid that mans general character was
always In issue and when he into court of JUS
tce he must be prepared to stand upon It, and defend
1t II necessary Therefore the evidence Of the witness
was admissible If indeed, charge Of stealing was to
be brought In that it would be right that
to that effect should be given to the party against
whom the accusation to be made that he might be
prepared to rebuff It, But the present q different
case.
The witnesses examination then proceeded He
eaid he lived in Beomingdae and kept hotel knows
he then kept COWS, and sold milk can't say hsw long
he had continued in that busness knows his general
character knows 1t Is spoken OF rs being bad had
heard 1t spoken of such within the last months
in fact within the last four months Clarke had been
represented to him as poor man, and witness had
passed his word for him for $40 his starry
ing had met him, and aeked him for the money ;
Clarke turned up his coat tail, and capped his =,
Qaughtsr)
CrosserGmined.-The money which witness had been
security had not been paid back by Clarke Clarke
had told him that he had sent wagon to the person
he did not reach us to whom witness had passed
his word, which was, he said, worth $50 when In rea
ty it was not worth S. He (witness) had feeling
aganst Clarke. He had treated him (wtness) very
unkindly and improperly but he would not do him
the smsllest injury on that account. Witness came
from Wiltehire in the West Of England about twenty
years ago. Had left his former residence decent
ought to do. Had paid his rent, and his frie nds
to him after he had left Had lived In Bos.
ton two years. Could not say how he had come TO be
suhp@nsed He had not expected being called wit
ness, and had not known anything Whatever about
the difficulties with Mr. Bennett. Mr.. Hawkes. had
known him for three years. Had heard several per-
49, A-N- xaA