The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-24

defeated by facts amounting 10 defence Ard ss be-
fore such defence is oompssss-H those words spok-
are true or II the communication s privAeged-
ss
which bec,me 20 only because Of The Affect which they
produce by causing special damage, will appear IN the
rules proper 70 give this subectSor your Guidance
Words in general and when there clrcums Ances
used are be taken and understood by The jury and to
be construed by the Court according 10 their ordinary
material and obvious mescng and where there are sur
10 be taken into view the words 10 be construct az the
person to whom they were used would lray and OBJ
viousb understand them, under the circumstances and IN
ion with the purpose with which they spoken
" the words, either they stand alone connection
with all the surrounding or attending circumstances are
ambiguous and susceptible Of various ntsrpr
OF which they impute ille In another Of which they
relate to PLAINTIFFS trade or business, and njure his
character in thai trade or business; another Of which
they neither impute crime nor relate to and affect the
plaintiff his trade but yet relate to and uurously affect
his general repuationt is for tho Jury TO hod, with AL
the light that be gathered from the evidence, how
they used, and were designed and calculated to be
understood The portion Of the words here paped of
which calls the plaintiff notorious liar does not mpute
crime to him. and they not therefore actonabe on
that ground You have then to the rosdae and
designed and calculated to be understood, imputed
charge that the plaintiff had embczzled or stolen
goods If they did, when reasonably AMI fnirly con-
strued with al The light tina. given you then they
are aconabe Of themselves and upon that ground
If they were used were under ali the attending cir
Gums tances including the explanation given at the tne
calculated 10 be understood as mere express ion OF
suspicion that be had embczzed or stolen gos or lad
obtained them In other dishonest manner they
acionabe OF themselves, unless the plaintiff
has in consequence Of tho expression of such suspicion
sustained the special damage which h, has alleged. The
other portion of tho words complained Of i Mr. Fowles
Ia such notorious liar that could place little or conf
be understood inpu.ng tho plaintiff conduct as clerk
which, true, rjuio 10 his character in that
tion such an extent that be entitled cond
-dence In that character then they actonab, and f
not justed) the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages
without any other proof On the ohcr hand If they i'm
pued TO him the vice OF lying, and nsoriety ar in
the that that his general reputation without
any particular reference his character or conduct
as clerk, then the plaintiff recover for this only
such special damage he has alleged and proved
and generally In relation to the whole communication
cnd % s sas 81 a. us Pa1 nS tnsTs is no mpSo9 Of
stood, with the aid Of all the facts explanations then
before the minds Of the parties given the subject
his conduct therein In reference 10 his fitness or WORTH
ness Of the confidence recessary In that relation his
IMPUTED to him conducs which was tended Si bm
In that vocation 1t actonable and proof Of special da
msee T. not necessary u the communication, then, was
upon any Of the grounds suggesed-the remaIang cues
ton is: what damages s he entitled TO recovery The do
kps or the house Of G. NJ Wood nor for particular mode
adopted and pursued by hem to verify the truth Of the
suspicion excited BY the deendaEs statement In regard
to his troubles For them the plaintiff recover
compensation in this action. He has his redress against
them If lie has not obtained done something debar
for the publicity given 70 the matter by the defendant
hlse-that publicity was, far 1t the plaintiffs
own act, hsew fault or pprudencc, and for that any
Injury resuDg therefore he cannot recover In this action
and If you find under the Instructions gven that
words companed Of are not within the description of words
actonabe in themselves-neither imputng crime
SPOKEN In respect of the plaintiffs business employment
then the plaintiffs recovery should be limited to the
acea damage alleged 10 the complaint and proved the
trial The only special damage alleged is that he was in
quence Of the words spoken discharged from the
employ Of The sad arm Of Geo Wood, ana was then,
baa Iofth Tho and of
said employ ment and has aimee been unable to obtain any
employ ment The loss to be empensated In III
discharged, and proof given offered that he has
been deprived Of employment II, therefore, you find tina,
pann has failed to prove the facts which alone makes the
words conabe. and the defendants entitled verdict
On tho other hand if the words are aciionable of them
selves, have already said the plaintiff is only bound to
that they spokeDof him by the defendant The
damages are peculiarly within your province TO detcr
mine ii should be done with single purpose 10 do what
just between the parties upon a deliberate and impartial
consideration Of all the circumstances proved before you
Compensation for the actual injury received Is the first
and main object 70 be attained and damage on this ground
Is in this aion TO be judged s whore specific damage
shown, by considering the ordinary and natural conse
qnenccs OF such impuions aud there you should stop,
unless you find that the words were uttered by the plain
tiff from actual malice in bad faith aud knowing be-
n,i confined to mere compensation but In your sound
discretion may add such further sum- by OF example,
as Is iass G@ sthacn or All Gssss d sHrsi.
states In his that he will prove true but fails to
In Judging this branch OF the subject as upon the whole
subject CT good faith, consider the previous letters III
writion with his assent and knowledge OF their purporD
the statement to Carter; the views giving 70 them a
limited construction claimed by defendant; al the evil
deDce which 10 your mind tends 10 prove tia, there
ID will towards the young In the defendant mind
the ac that he mno.ed secrecy (rhcb; though 1t docs
not justify may tend to mitigate ,ae wrtnE) tho eyt,nt
10 which he explained the grounds OF tho opinion Bat II,
notwithstanding these and other considerations that have
been urged upon you you still 1nd that The words were
spoken In bad faith, with malicious motive TO njure
when he did believe what he said TO be rue,hen
before said you not confined TO making the conIcn
salon which the plaintiff would be entitled If such
malice and bad faith existed. Guded by the directions
have 81 genaicd by the observations OF tho counsel for
the respective parties, aud moved by the single purpose
L. render Justice ana only justice between these pares
tut and believe, gentlemen, that you will bo able 10
agree upon a verdict vhich shall accomplish that enl
Some exceptions taken by both council 10 portions
VI the charge.
The Jury having been absent about hour, returned
with verdict for paiAun Of $i,J0oihe jlr! the fer
trial awarded $4,000,