The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-04-09
Ln1y IntelllUrnre.

ANOTHER LIBEL CASE IN PHILAprLPHIA.--Yesterday,
before Judge Kelley in the Criminal Court, Dallas A.
Kneass tried n charge Of publishing libel do
famatory Of the reputation Of J. H. Ghon. The prose-
euton alleged that the defendant is Of the agents
Of the National Police Gazette Of New York, and
tho habit Of vending papers containing ibels upon the
character Of MIR Gihon. One Of these papers publish
ed several months ago. put in evidence and proved
to have been purchased ut the store Of the defendant
The Commonwealth here closed its case The dcfen-
dant offered testimony g. w. BARTON, ESQ., for the
defence admitted the article in question to be libel
and that the author Of onght to be severely punish
liable for the mere .aie OF paper the contents OF
which he had knowledge. He said that instead Of
the proceedings against the mere vendor, Mr. Wilkes,
the editor Of the paper in New York ought TO have
been prosecuted for the libel If that offence had been
committed. and urged that the Commonwealth had the
power TO bring him here, II such complaint had been
instituted TO sustain this view, he referred to the
instructions which Judge Parsons had given to Mr..
Reed in the case Of Winch similarly charged at the
last term CT the court, viz: to send a bill Of in.
dictmcnt against the editors and publishers Of
a paper in New York, before the Grand Jury, 20
that q rtquisiton should be sent for them.
MIR. b. eontendcd that, under the law, the defen-
dant net responsible and II the jury agreed with
him IN hs view Of the law they ought TO acquit,
withdrawing the doctrine Of the court might be ad
TO the propositions which he had made inasmuch
both the law and the facts and according to Judge
Lewis ehange In the Of the Commonw wealth vs.
Hnggery-tri,d for homicide at Lancaster-are not
bound 90 take the law from the court without they
believe IL to be correct
Mt RIrp for the Commonwealth, commented upon
the law, which fully made the defendant liable to a
that the editor in New York could be arrested and
brought here fer trial; arrest Of person only
be made in another State when he il there fugitive
from justice. Now. was there any offence committed
the part Of the editor hcre and if there was, had
he fed from the jnstice Of this State Mr. r. urged
conviction II the defendant, and showed the
quoncs which must ensuc to society in where the
law adequate to redress Of this charact but
where the jury disr,gard the law and go contrary to
Its plain aiming and construction under the influence
q the ingenious arguments Of counsel
Judge KLEY charged that II truc that the jury
were 60 upon the law and the evidence but II they
did not receive the law from the court there could be
uniform rule for the government cascs He then
paced to the accaon against the defendant for the
publication Of libel The inquiries were, the
tice lbellons and there publication Of IL! He
would answer both questions distinctly afRrmatively
he jury then TO ascertain the defendant pub
G he'd the pepper in question. II they believed from |
The evidence that be did then their verdict should be
that q guilty II he did not then they required
10 scqult hun.
1he jury retired but in the Of the afternoon
REF urntd with verdict Of guilty The sentence o. the
defendant deferred for the prcscnt.-PhodepAio
I<dsev .Gf,yt7.