The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-05-20

proved, n ~ iscumSsss = Ne gev~smoos 70 prcvs
has sd dsf.6snsS octvss h Applying the same 70 sac
SAD =: vr, ssss ne srr>es vas a. sns stssaa.
70 snow charged 10 be hosacos was pos
Isbsd good motives aud for jastnsbie ends ta4:
nee sssy imply perssusl Ill wi 10 wards the Persos
bbeeo. The defendant excepted 10 the ruling Of the
N case and coo.sndeS that having proved chs truth u
AL the TAGS alleged IN The Loe and the p7bcsaon oeice
In re'e coce 70 an illegal TAno puoo NUISANCE, Zoo
jury should have been Instructed toat wls incumseS'
on the euvernweDt 70 show that said oners motives
msclccs IN ths popular serse 81 the word s res
poets Brown; and tns, the cehlion aforcsad given BY
toe Judge, u legal ux,,ce, Is incorrect and vct
oonfcrms0le 10 sad Revised Statutes, and ehs.
such msioe only would sustain tho indiosmsns
(Sbs~ c ~ Tue Court ~ opinion that the charge
the Judge OF Court Of Common P,eas str,oy
correct pubcssicn DO lioellousthas s b such ~
bring person lb-llcd into hatred. contempt AID
ridcuIe amoosss che people, malice presnsd froo the
narous act But 10y Rev Sta G. 1888, soc % I'm every
prorscutcu for writing pusshag oe the dessadass
may give evidence In his defence upos tAe trial, ese
truth OF the oontAiped the publication charged A.
belous that ION evtence stall not 30 dee1ea
ssafhcteot jusslcaioa uuess Il soai DO furt.er msae
pussheA sih good motives aud for Jasaas ,e eses
Nothing can he more explicit The judge taerepre, W.
rsht in directing the jury that after inc puoac.t0u
bad been 70 have made by the defeadsot,
and To be- nbei,ous and mAlo,ous, the ourdsa was
ths msttes charged =, ube Ioas, bss likewise taas
va ON bed IN good and for Unstable ends
a
cripos or osao,iou q legal malice; that i Is not malice
IN rs popular .nas SPARED and Ill viii to tina
pArty nbe'ed but act Jooe rifaiy nswui'y, sod
10 violation or the just rights OF another" Nov geI.o
q, take that definition of legal malice and apply ii 70
this In this couoectoo will call your attention 10
tho testimony OF Meesrs Walker and Dawes Mr. Walker
says De mad conversation with this defendant prior to
the publication that 1t shown sad read 70 him. tna'
he tod him was utterly elso, and ADVISED 81 TO sppy
Il Mr. Wood; but Carr sted that every word WAs
and insisted that he could prove the truth Of the allie
Cations contained io that publication II for yoa 70 sss
whether malice in this vhe her CD,
defendant Influenced or not by feeling towards
the ccmplangnttna the question for yonr detst as
ton r. therefore geIueDen, the defendant should fsa
In his proof Of Justification ana show tnat tne poocauoo
with GOOD motives and for Jusunsbe ends, II
cannot avail him; OF IT, therefore, the Jusi1osu,s
has not been shown be broad the charge; Il
the deierdsst proved .hc entire ruth Of tbs srpoe
il question rt n you should believe he VAS not ia1
enced sctuat BY good motives or for eods
Will be your duty 70 convict Diyes yourselves, gentle
men, of sli preu1cee either on the one side or the
other this Your verdic is OF r portapce 70 the
people we'll TO tbis defendant Ga the haot
you have The character and reputation OF ngn pubic
officer entrusted your Care; whist, the other you
bsvs the ersoDai liberty OF this Defendant Exsmiua the
eviseuce carefully Apply the rules Of ls~ s,o dosa by
the court ard reader your verdict ~,aout 70 the
consequences 10 either Genhemen, mag AS well Cal
your attention 10 the proposLops submitted by The
eel for the Defendant, which am requested 10 charge
They as follows
All publications relating to public matters OF 70 sas
ects in which the public bare interest," sod wacn sre
true, privileged abs utey. cannot agree with tass
proposition, said the jugs.
ers subjscts he party publishing believed the pub
csiion To be true, the publication privileged and DO
indictment; can be maintained thereon. Cannot SUP
scribe 10 that doctrine.
by the Get Of toe prosecutor any OF his subor-
CLIMATES the writer OF the paper coDpa oed OF was, or
might have been lie thu belief OF the truth Of the
upou which he such belief supernducsd takes
away all malice which ia the essence OF the offence
cannot suoscrbe 10 thai positioa.
the jury believe that Mr.. Carr wrote the article
question intending show the community the deects
os the .ysie,n of stree, aud stated VIA, De be
Ilav<x ha no ard AZ nd
ton Of tho ccfnmuDy at the time az tae pnScaor OF the
article exbsed deep interest in the subject mater Of
the publraon that then the publ ca ioo is privileged
and br CAR must be acquitted cannot subscribe to
1at
O. II r Carroll the person having charge Of the bust.
aoss OF pe8nss charged Tor pay Tor
drawing Ct copying The reports, no did 80 la viola
s- ths purposes Of tLo defence o. Mr.. Carr Mr..
eTrcs 10 DO deemed the acts OF Boseei In this
respet and Groves toe tram OF he assertion that ne
ceysd psy r services rendered 10 stree. openings rus
dilouy N his csse, geLt n that Mr CarroswCss
be received any fluids, all that was received
pa.d out by hm.
Mr.. whdng-I Deg yocr Honot's pardon; he said he di
judge Bpsssll-ifNr c. Toll has committees any GRIN.
iral oiierc he gers0ay eeporsibc, aad the Cor
porston Counsel In criminal m-ss = person eaonos
nave sgept
o The whole Article s, t, be taken together aud al
though part ony OF soc rum stated IN the bill rendered.
by counsel ~ the CorpOr point OF
by Mr. Carroll, yot the jury believe that charge wss
made therein Tor drafting Sns copying the report Thea
he jury ought to acqui cannot 50 oscroe " that
T. Where the Rrcle relates - public msers public
puo.5 Offices ard the jury dod tho entire article
substantially true, where the writer believed 20 be
true or whore he o. tho prosecutor any ot his
suborcinaes n Office furnish mater Ipoo whsh the
OF tie article rad ne right TO bessve thai
true then 10 aosreni Of lac TIE motive s good aod the
end Unsuitable IcanDct oscrioe t. ips. proposiiisn
8 Wbcr tDe article Is suscepuele OF two inierprcts
tons IL the oug OF courts snf lu-ns 10 give tat 10
srste.Ation when Is most innocent and that which
s moss vicious. PROFESSIONALLY gsntiemen, that h a
questcs you detrmIrs you ssve the sh 10 pass
gpon n - men Of plain common sense
yr Wilmington w understand me, sir, 90 excepting
20 your rnl.Dgs on 10y propositions
Judge k1stell-les, SIR.
TIE Jury taen ret,rsd 70 Their rOo1i Il being ;sc.ty
minutes pAs two When the trial Of Continued
uil pseiy four O'Clock immeaistey ater the
WAS cleared the jury yacsled toe Apartment ~ stairs
sod occupied TIE court ro1n where rcfrnsh
provided for bem, having rumsted 10 toe Jldge tna
here possibility OF their agreeing i.nmsiA,oly
The court room crowded throughout the FAY, aud
tho mcri ~ ns exciune Ease were freely 1ncussei ny
uis aaaonce Tho syrpathes Of tbs attendants II the
uial were freely expreeaef 10 bsbsn OF tbs defendant,
and the Ja6ge's charge ras matter which furnished ma
erih for tbs deysopmst OF the ingnsl powers N tns
otzenss la majority OF shom were Of tbs decttsf
OPINION that TIE Of tho charge nnfsvora
NT. Carr.
mis- tri,J, although the punhhreut attached 70 the
oenos 81 ronina, will hs iS7g remembered ~ snoee
who pr,scnt witness ths scenes (as counsel
for defence ther) ins, enactsd caring
ia progress, cf whi-o worthy Of nentou A
tbs Tssie eOue' "a tie prosecutor took hg stand
xtbr tbs rslng Usually o,Cu ped BY the psct Atlor.
rey - be prorerutcr) sis' removed as quarters and
sn.od himself crety 70 front o. the jury Aad ryeed
eyea uon them cccagcnAlv srai1g fro xr log
ousy nj intervals ard tben sgsa oodcog sssslt shes
THE counsel Who afirOisng tbs jury you'd remark
TIA. his Icno- chArre them ard the poic
which be ~ elaSoratin9
me jnry hsd not AIRED upor verde. Gt hsf past
feven ocloos whereupor hs Homer reuruef IN his res
ard they fsied ~ upcn verdIcs tOrr0~ v)ol1
fseg them tsgethcr anoiher usSht