The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-04-16


Thatcher our house received letter from the Messrs.
Smith copy Of which is handed to me- the letter
used in obtaining the insurance. delivered the let
ter to the Atlantic Insurance Company
BENJAMIN Galbraith-I am attorney and counsellor
by Capt Thatcher the damages laid at $50 600;
aware how the intelligence came to New York; il
published in the Boston Traveller and reached New York
by telegraph from Boston think it given TO both
the tribune and Herald simultaneously.
Cross examined did not see the teegraphic despatch
but read copy Of il in the HERALD.
Mr. Otterson city editor of the Tribune deposed TO the
receipt of the news by telegraph from Boston.
Messrs Blunt and Mathews summed up on either side,
( nd the Sheriff briefly charged the jury.
After deberation the jury gave damages against
the Tribune for $3.50.
MELANCHOLY REVIEW OF THE CASE BY THE TRIBUNE.
IRON the New York Tribune, April 81
AN INCIDENT OF OUR CALLING.
On the oath of April 1882 there appeared among our
Geographic dispatches the following
rRoM burNos AYEEs-AN AMERICAN SCHOONER TURNED
,.,.r FROM nu.no Bosras Friday gis April % is's
here ~ ngrs dated 'h February
IN. Brazilian ADMIRAL sent note 70 Commodore Mckee
gone from hence 70 the soat Of ra,ag0ni. there raised
lett % MAI The vessel
pirate Woe 5etds them il they fall into the hands Of Al
OF course it need not be told that we received this in
regular from telegraphic agent at Boston,
that it founded mercantile letter from Buenos
Ayres stated abovethat note received by Com.
McKeever from the Brazilian Admiral as above said-and
that Capt Thatcher of the American schooner Draco had
left South American port under circumstances which
created strong suspicion the part of the authorities
that his intent pratcal. So much true but it
was not true that Capt Thatcher had turned pirate
intended to do On the contrary, he after
to light again. explained the circumstances which had
engendered the suspicious of the Brazilian authorities,
and in due time came home and sued (among other
edors) for libel
What could We do2 Had Capt. Thatcher wished re-
traction our mistaken despatch and complete vindi-
cation of his character he had but to ask and should
very cheerfully have done all that he could
qure. But what he was after money, and he de-
.a1 p1a NJ 1,o
conveniently pay. II would have been absurd for to
have attempted 10 placate him by volunteering expana
tons and assurances that had intended to do
him any wrong-he knew that as well as we dd-knew
that had previous knowledge OF him whatever and
no conceivable motive to harm him-knew how the i'm
preston that he had turned pirate had originated and
that whether he not free from blame in
the premises we certainly So had nothing TO
do but to meet the issue thus forced upon best
might
But how2 To join issue with him both hazard
and useless. Had we attempted technically to
Justify publication the Court would have held US
bound TO prove the plaintiff pra<e, which could
not and would not do Had we undertaken TO plead
the general issue that issue would have been explained
by the Court to imply that did not print any such
despatch as charged in the plaintiffs declaration
and that We did not wish to pretend. What did
wish TO get rid of all techncaites and formaltes
and go before an honest intelligent jury, saying
'fYes certainly did publish the despatch complained
Of but did it without shadow of malice i'll feel
ing in perfect good faith suppesng and having good
And deemed advisable to this end not to join issu(
with the plaintiff but to let the go to Sheriff.
jury. This did and before that jury enabled Z
present evidence sufficient TO convince any honest
rational being that had intended wrosg Captau
Thatcher and had done him except in giving
rency TO the inference undoubtngy though mis- aSenJ
drawn by the Brazilians from his conduct and tha
had not been careless reckless in giving
roroy to the report from Bucnos Ayres concerning him.
And yet, in the face Of all this tue jury fl to
denim TO pay Capt Thatcher six hundred and fty dol
lars beside costs. The of the jurymen who
dercd this verdict are as follows
=. ii. Holt -four merchant, No. 230 Front street
J. b Wilson, merchant, No. &c William street.
H. H. Casey, merchant, No. II Merchants Exchange.
II. Wilson, seaman, No 40 Sheriff street.
IL MEL Cuttis merchant, No. III Pearl street
flliam Depcw ml ortor, No. 1876 Pearl street
Greene street
Geo Browne, merchant, No III Front, or exchange,
15l Houston street
J. A. Moore, tailor, No 61 willett street.
Titus X. Adee, mot in the Direetory.)
J. b, Hillyer, late drugs No. as London terrace.
A. Spencer publisher, No. IL Ann, printer, No 200
Broome, painter, No. l99 Eighth avenue
Wen: we shall try to pay the money thus conveyed
honorahly and usefuly, proudly say we have
earned it, If he does well in suing all who printed
substantially what did, his fortune is made. If the
jurors are, reflection satisfied with their part in the
business so be it, But cannot agree with the EreNag
the injustice of the present law OF libel" That law has
sins enough to answer for but really cannot how
il to blame for this verdict The jury might have chos-
to strip of last shilling; but would that have
been the fault Of the awS We cannot regard it. True
We hold that the law ought to shield editor, who in
good faith publishes current apparently accurate
and If SO, decidedly important to the community from the
legal technical presumption Of malice where
ifost that actual malice exsted-ust the
master in giving (according 10 his best judgmen the
character of his late servant the district attorney in
drawing upa criminal Indictment against q who
may finally prove innocent II is just essential TO the
well being of society that editors be protected in CIV
ing the earliest tdings TO vessel supposed and
reported to have turned pirate Though It should after
wards prove mistakenly that judgS be at liberty
TO sentence and admonish convict from the bench
without subsection to suit for libel in that convict
should afterwards prove innocent We know that did
precisely our uty in printing the news sent from
Boston respecting Capt Thatcher and his schooner
the jury equally satisfied Of the correctness of thu
action in the premises afford to drop the sule
But feel confident that If these gentlemen had be-
severally asked, each in his individual capacity to
how much actual damage had been inflicted CaI
Thatcher by the appearance of this despatch in the
bune-that is how much better he would have stood
had suppressed this despatch at the time Of lisa,
pearance in all the commercial journals throughout the
country-not more than two of them would have laid
bis damage from pub ication high fifty dollars
II to wrong, then, to charge the libel laws,
which have quite enough to for with the dis
ere dit Of this verdict which does not really belong to
them. IL these laws perfect II would still be DIM
cult TO d pense with common common honesty
n jurors.