New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-11-14
THE BARBARITIEs TOP MRS. DECKER

NJ s. ford occupied about four hour. ia his .e.ci
during which several Of the Jurors nodded very oen.
hr. Lot G. Cuk, after his Associate Mr.. Holmes,
had submitted 10 the Court the priacples Of Law and
the authorities which they clsimed 10 belong to this
case, summed up for the defence. His address was
clear, forcibls ard manly. He did not deseesd to
,ophi.iy vituperstion bu. presented the cle1
varrlhed facts Of the care, and by chain of evidences
the most col vncipg justified the severity Of the al
les ed libel. At 81 p m. his Honor, Judge Drdseye,
commerced bis charge 10 the Jury concluding al 30
Il wss impartial and explicit, and gave eseers salts
faction. In opening he impressed upon the minds Of
tho July the grave responsibility imposed upon
them BY their osths. This was no uifpg mat.
ter TO plaintiff or defendant. The alleged libel
was charge or series of charges Of the graves.
nature sgairst the character Of the paatia It was
for the jury to say bow far those charges, mich the
def.rdsr. had come into Court and declared were true
had been proved and then to renders verdict free and
full. regardless Of every other interest Here his
Honor explained the difference between the cid Law Of
libel and the amend ed law, IS now in force. The ev.
dence vas to be tfted with the utmost care, aud it
was the duty of the jury 10 reconcile apparent dis
crepances of testimony, If it were possible to do so.
They were first to take the case a. whole and to see
If i. was fully proved. The justification should bc as
broad as the libel II the charges were not fully sus-
tanned in every particular were they substantially jus
tiiedi If the justification wa. not complete, the
plaintiff was entitled TO verdict. But II the charges
were partially proved the amount Of damages would
be modified in proportion to the damage done BY that
portion Of the charge which was proved.
How much her character was worth was to be
measured by the amount of character left to her after
the commission of the Infamous acts proved, and how
much that remnant of character was damaged by the
acts charged but not proved was to be expressed In
the amount of the damages swarded-shs; Is, that
her character Wa not damaged by the defendant, By
the publication of her own Infamous scts, iaasmuch
as by their commission the plaintiff had brought the
injury to hersef and that the damages, if any from
the acts charged but not proved applied only TO the
character not injured destroyed by the acts proven
The Judge then referred to the testimony generally,
and the Jury retired.
After an absence of ten or 6Heen minutes the Jury
returned With verde. for the plaintiff of siI cents
damages.
This does not carry cnsts
The jury we're then discharged, with the thanks Of
the Court.
Mrs. Decker was present In Court as she had been
throughout the trial. Her countenance, as she sat
facing the Jury stening to the details of her cruelty
did not change in the least. She sat quite cool
through the whole, summing up and all, strange
spectacle Of Indifference in the midst Of proceedings
which held Others in almost bresthless interest Her
principal Amusement was pulling threads from her
posl Q. handk crchef ard twisting them between her
fingers She seemed to manifest no interest, one way
nor another. The indictment for msnssughter against
her viii be tried next week. The result Of the libel
suit was received with very general satisfaction in
Richmond County.