The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-10-05
Marine Court.

Before Judge Phillips.
OcT. 3.-JoHN F. GMARD AND OTHERS vs. Mos!s L. BsAcu
AND JOSEPH w. STAGG-AcToN LIBEL Nsw
YORK SUN.-This action brought against the de-
PENDANTS for having published advertisement in the
Sun detrimental to the characters Of the mombers OF
Hose Company No H. In the Sun of the 18th Of Doceu-
Der last appeared the following advertisements
TnExEs-A SINGULAR CASE or RnxoRsx OF Cor
days since ha. stolen me- BY some Of she menbsrs
SfNS Il Hose company and being much it.
ass p all aa Il s 10 nS
the brains the penten thieves They having noshins fur
s s s f ss and as a~. a.
sr from their subsequent acts that thy now y re-
The counsel for the plaintiffs claimed for his clients
judgment against the defendants to the full ~
having wrongfuly imputed criminal offence to the said
plaintiffs and holding them up to undescrved public
legged libel made defence whatever. Mr. Beach (ths
publisher Of the advertisemen only defence that he
called to it by the plaintiffs attorney and likewise that he
under tho belief that an action fer libel could
not be brought for publication concerning number
persons The Judge charged the jury this case 81
some length, explaining to them the law in regard
whole community, or all ecclesiastics would be :
libel yet it be against the Bishops particular class
proof that he one of the persons intended to be de-
famed ymaintain action 5h Johnsons reports page
PENDANT proprietor of paper responsible for what
ever appears in his columns and it unnecessary show
that he knew Of the publication or authorized 1t. Tho
jury then retired and after consideration rendered
verdict for the plaintiff Of $50 and costs.
Before Judge Mccarthy.
GroRC. BrIr1s URBw NEwToa.-rhis action
gainst defendants, of the steamboat Empire
ommon carriers for goods damaged their way from
roy or after their arrival here before they deliver
I'd to plaintiff
The defendants plead that fraud had been perpetra
ted on them by the person at Troy who shipped the goods
in representing that the box contained nothing old
mpy boxes that freight only charged and received
1T that rate. whereas, If they had been Informed of tho
fact Of the box containing valuable silk and velvet goods
would make difference to the rate of freight DO
charged and the OF the goods The Court SUE
tanned This view Of the case and gave judgment for de-
| PENDANTS, with costs.
HognssNT vs. PARRRv--This action to recover
amount Of note made and endorsed by defendant Fay
men is resisted on the ground that after the note
made defendant gave the Mr. Webor give it to
Mr. Schmidt Schmidt denies receiving IL and for
bid defendant to pay The Judge refused TO ecovs the
evidence, and directed the jury that the plaintiff Was
entitled 10 recover having paid consideration for the
note and he not being party To any transaction BE-
tween defendant and any other person. unless notice 10
traced home to them. Verdict for plaintiff, $50 GA.
Rt1naJoRD AGAINST AfHIRrsos.-This was an action 10
recover $3.50 note made ny defendant in 1915 with
interest since duo The Defendant pleads the statute or
limitations and Offset for moneys due from the former
husband Of plaintiffs wife, who defendants brother.
Tie Ilantil proved that defendant absent in Calls
forna eighteen months and insisted That the 90.
tute Of limitations did not during Stat time Thefie-
PENDANT then offered TO call the OF tle plaintiff a.
witness prove his offset The Judge to ROC iva
the evidence the ground that husband wife o,nst
be a witness for against the other in any civil AZ ton
contrary rule would lead TO breach of thai coaH fence
which should exist between parties in chat relat,os
Judgment for plaintiff for S22 80 and $12 Az oyance
and coste.
| Before Judge Mccarthy.
OCT NlrE vs. SANpRsos tUTioN TO CONr RACroaa
This was an action TO yer for personal nW
by plaintiff in falling into excavation defendants
premises IN Twenty ninth street. TENTH avenue on
the evening OF the .9ih of August Last.
Jecnce, that ordinary and diljgeD was USED by
defendant Verdict for The complinans 500 which doc~
not cover costs.