The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-03-19

ACTION ron LIRKL ON Nh. FORREST.
MARCH l7.-EdsOsn Forrest Us. Hiram F.uer.-The coun.
sci in this having summed up the Judge prooeeded
to charge the jury After stating the particulars Of the
action the Judge said 1T the duty Of the jury to
Court and without entering on the excitement, to see
that justice done to both parties The jury must
not that they were doing giving the
entitled to IT. they 70 give all their sympa
thy to the defendant unless il had been made to appear
that he had published the article without Intention Of
nIuying the plaintiff in character reputation or feeling
The jury must give the plaintiff the actual damages he
had sustained under all the circumstances taxing INTO
PENDANT at the time the libel was published. That
the defendant is accountable for the action OF his agents
any motive which might exist in the breast Of his agents
for the publication Of this libel or for any malice
they might have against the plaintiff, nor for their
malice in any way; only for his own actual malice
When express malice existed the law, neverthe-
less the libel to be false and you to con
slider all the allegations in the libel to be false but you
also to take with ii that the is true, which
says that the libel selected by the sub editor in the
of his duties and that selected from
other paper That therefore is not an admission that
the answer said it not selected 1t it was select
ed and you are so to regard But 1t Is not said that it
taken from the St Lsus Ree and you are to take
that into consideration. 1t is said that If other men
choose to adopt and circulate Islander they are liable
liable for it, But you to regard all the circumstances
under which II to be published Whether be stated
what he believed to true coming from another person
makes no difference, question OF law But as ques-
ton Of damages for to consider it. The next
proposition is that the law some malice from
the libel Itself The law does not presume express ma
nce But when express malice does exist II should be
severely punished by the jury. am requested by
plaintiff to say that the mitigating crcumsta
to be taken dsproving the malice and charge you
This much regards the question of law. The other
matters are for your confederation You are to take
questions OF law from the Judge, and the Judge is
wrong, the parties can appeal to higher tribunal As
regards the facts it may be proper to remark that
libel published. No newspaper produced,
evidence introduced, to prove that il published
ished because it is alleged in the peadings and not
denied in the You to pply the same rule
to the complaint to the answer of the defendant and
you especially to notice that the answer does not
contain matter and does not affirm the libel to be
true The mitigating circumstances are that defendant
is the prncpa editor of the paper and had sub agents
whose business it to select for them, and that
of these sub editors selected the article in the of
his duty without the defendants knowledge consent
notice You bound to take that true and it is
mitigating circumstance, because If the whole article
the invention of the defendant himself and that he
tiff then the damage should be greater than if the pub
LEGATION without his Knowledge and that when he
heard of 1t he discaimed any knowledge OF it. II so 1t
should go to lessen the damages But If on the next
day, when he it. he continued it. that sh ould in
the damages more than if he had not done so.
The question: therefore whether he did or did not do
should be considered in giving your damages That de-
PENDANT did not see it until it published must be
taken into consideration But it admitting that
fact that after the publicaton he did it. You will
con slider the fa that it was published without
his knowledge, and whether it came to his knowl-
menced. In regard to the measure of damages, the
only facts to be considered that the plaintiff
tragedian of great eminence before this libel pub
lshed and continues to this day 1t be that the
libel not injurious to him because Of his high stand
ing in his profession his high moral character But
mans feelings must be outraged by upon
his character, spoken wrongfully malciousy. You
viii not therefore, infer that he is only to get nominal
damages but you are to give him damages for the inu
ries sustained in his character feelings You
bound give damages for both these considerations
The latter however has not been alleged the part of
the plaintiff But still you bound to give him dam
ages for whatever injury he suffered in his character
reputation feelngs or for both When attempt is
made to sustain libel by alleging that it is true
when the defence is that the libel is true and that
the party puts it record and it is not shown to
be true usual to charge the jury to give greater
amount of damages account of the motive Of the
But in this there is nothing of that The peadings
admit the libel to be untrue and there is evidence to
show that the defendant called to retract this
libel.
The Judge then read the libel which he said,
lected by the sub editor of the Mirror and the jury
to determine the of damages to which the plain
| tiff entitled.
| March 1S.-verdiet for plaintiff $3.50.