New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-02-27

of the ljyinp-nay, as an Editor himself, he
was under additional obligation not to stand
forth a general calumniator of his profess
sional brethren Having published his Dis
course without abridgement or comment,
we feel constrained to indicate, very brief
". some of the misconceptions and mis-
statements embodied in his account Of the
libel suits brought by Mr.. Cooper against a
number of the journals of this State. Mr..
BRYANT errs, then, as follows:
|. In giving the impressions that these
libel suits were wholly based on uafriendly
criticisms of Mr.. Cooper's literary produc-
lions. Some of them were SO; but the
larger number originated in neighborhood
quarrel. The people Of Cooperstown had
been accustomed on boating excursions to
land upon a barren point of rock jut!ing
from Mr.. Cooper's grounds into Oisego
Lake, which he abruptly, and as they
thought churlishly, compelled them to evac.
uate and abandon. Their indignation at
this found utterance in a newspaper of the
village, which was copied aPprovingly by
others; and thereupon Mr.. Cooper COM
menced libel suits-not waiting five weeks
after the date of the offense-mUh less
the five years that Mr.. Bryant talks of.
Our offense, among others, consisted In
structures on his manner of prosecuting his
libel suits.
2. Mr.. Bryant asserts that -" Cooper was
uniformly successful in obtaiaiDg verdicts."
This is upfounded. He brought Col. Webb
to trial repeatedly, and with almost If net
quite uniform i'll success; he sued The
Tribune on two several occasions, the
last time some eight or nine years ago, bu;
never brought the suit to trial; he threat.
ened us with several suits that he never
saw fit to institute; and he was finally
beaten before the Court of Errors in his
second suit against Col. Stone of The
Commercials Chancellor Walworth and
other eminent Jurists pronouncing opinions
decidedly and very broadly against him,
and the Court dividing about four to one.
This suit, if he paid his lawyers fairly, can
hardly have cost him less than One Thou
sand Dollars.
3. Mr.. Bryant says cooper behaved
literally toward his antagonists, so far as
pecuniary damages were concerned" We
know no facts to warrant this statement,
and challenge the production Of any. We,
certainly, never had any evidence of this
liberality we know that the trunk of Mr..
Barber, of The Otsego Republican. was
opened By an officer and several hundred
dollars taken therefrom in satisfaction of a
judgment rendered in Mr. Cooper's behalf
in one of these libel suits; and we know
that, after Col. Stones lamented death, his
widow and child were required to meet the
expense of carrying up the case given
against Col. S. to the Court of Errors, I'M
til the rovoroal of the Judgment below threw
that cost on Mr.. Cooper. If the latter ever
took any thing less than the law allowed
him when he could collect a judgment, we
do not know where.
4. Mr.. Bryant represents Mr.. Cooper as
hiumphiDg in his warfare on the Press,
and as having in the end " disciplined it
into good manners" This is wholly I'M
warranted. That the manners Of The
Tribune, for example, are siDgularly bland
and exemplary, all the world readily
agrees; but we deny that they prof!ed one
whit by the discipline of Mr.. ]. Feni-
mole Cooper. On the contrary, we think
the opportunity was all on his side, and the
Improvement should have been there if
any where.
We cannot see wherein his triumph con-
sisted. He certainly made neither money
nor credit out of Col. Webb. He collected
che verdict of $3.50 from Col. Stone, and
must have lost thrice that amount in prose-
cutting his subsequent unlucky suit against
that kind-heaIted and just man, who was
never capable of libeling any one. lie got
a $500 verdict and sos costs out OF The
Tribune and must have spent in his various
forays upon US at least $500. His verdicts
against the Country journals, when he re-
covered, were all Insignificant, and were
not all collectable when obtained, SO that
the experiment of suing them must have
been less profitable than hog shearing. The
only man he ever did compel to stand and
deliver to any purpose was Mr.. Weed OF
The Albany Evening Journal, whom ne
may have relieved, first and last, of $4,000,
mainly in costs and charges. Now Mr..