The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-03-03

sect there opinions in Dr. waylands book gensr
ally supposed not TO be enertaiuei by DIR. Judson th
witness then read certain extrlcts from Dr. wayland
work. tending to show difference OF opinion between DR.
Judson and the author the subScct Of communica
favor Of p"so tn. in Ssns
fengious publications. there were not hall
dozen facts on one page OF matter in the plaintiffs
BOOK thar were original TO Dr. Wayiands book and IL
In no sense an abrdgment OF the latter in piin
the paintihs book the witness made OF isolated
facts eniy, taken from Dr. waylands work, and
in more than half dozen instances witness bad un
deraksn this work two three the bca
tion OF Dr. Waylands which he had not then Thorough
read bat part only he had read the greater part OF
the original matter, but coud not state exactly how
much the journals incorporated Eto the work wercfa-
misr 70 HIM already; he endeavorsd 70 avoid avaing
himself OF any fact that he had in tho other book
and even referred TO the newspapers journals in
49,, 'ueh ni " ne matter Incorporated INTO Dr. way
ianns pook mad originally appeared, rather than to
make use OF the latter in compiling his own; In using
iacs oerved from Dr. Wayland's book he used his own
apgosge and not that Of Or wayland, in order not
infringe in the slightest degree upon the rights OF r
Judson witnefs had written the preface hs work
and all the facts therein stated he steadasty believed
and believes TO be true he had been member Of the
Baptist church in this country for nine years. and was
aware that the whole OF the foreign correspondence OF
missionaries Is not always published In the religious
mag szine OF that sect.
Other witnesses deposed that they knew tho plaintiff
Tor years and that they thought that another book
this life OF DR. Judson necessary In nee of
difference of opinion existing the best method OF
conducting missionary societies
The Judge in the course OF his charge TO the Jury
SAID that as Tar as the matter OF the publication IL
cerned the law deems 1t to be belous. The Baptist
Church has been mixed up in this affair and II IL had
been at peace with tseif the Court should have
heard anything Ct this libel. These church qusrres
were never for any good. He never knew that
not more or less damaging to either side In tha end In
this case Mr. Fletcher has right to say and he does
say, that there was nothing like an exclusive
right to write book any particular subject
The law gave copyright for book, but any
number OF men may write books any given
subject so that neither OF them infringe upon
any eciton for which copyright has been granted
Loosng at the evidence did appear that the book writ
ten by DR.. Wayand not the one calculated TO be
most useful as life of Dr. Judson and thereason s It
was too yoluminous; and II considered that Dr.
Wayand had given undue prominence TO the particular
views he entertained on this Bapts. Church question
the jury should come to the that this i'm
putation on Mr.. Fletcher justified the pllintin
would not be entitled TO IT they came to the
contrary conclusion, then he would be liable. The de.
fsndant had published the letter without comments
Nr. WAyland did not intend toe letter FOR publication
but Mr. Norton thought proper TO publish IT. and he must
stand the consequences
Mr.. Willard asked the Court TO charge the jury that
If the defendant wrote to DR. wayland for the purpose
OF exacng from him accusation OF this Mind snst
the plaintiff, 1t was aggrayation of the offence.
The Court Undoubtedly, gentlemen, that is so.
The jury, in about ten minutes rendered verdict for
the defendant