New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-09-14
Ms. msNsn's OPENING.


IN action for libel: printed communication IN hi
TRIBUNE. publisbed in Hcw-Yor& by Horace Greeley
the defendant, charging DO Witt G. Llttleohn' tne
plaintiff with corruption as legislator. oeVerai ar
cles appeared at different tmcs in THE TRIBUNE upon
that subiect-one upon the llSs of September, and
another one-the one upon which 'his action
on the Goth of Sepember and 1Aird one on the o.n
OF October. Mr.. Ltleohn the article OF '1e ~.
Of September the one upon which We cue, ana wrole
to Mr. Greeley expressly denying the a,lsgasn; ,h
that article Mr. Greeley published that letter. Win
TRADE Of abuse- libel far worse in pons OF fact snan
Tue other one-showing degree OF
H. ana without any further inquiry into rs Prenscs.
In selecting upon the libel on which tho action =
brought-for did not choose to bring Gil action on
ali OF tbewe selected this second one, WHOM Is ia
these words:
cOrreOndsnt ssrne'ty inquiries opinion Concerning
john osweso aud Of Austin Myers syracuse On tbs sub.
jet our opinion has been oen expressed Tia. eannO Le IN
doubt Both these prominent In the corrupt legs
stion of Winter Accordingly both Of them ought nov TO
Albany should be the work Of Republican vOteI'
Thereby charging Mr.. Litlejohn, ss a member Of
that Legislature land it is well known to all Of that
lie Speaker of the House ut the me with corrup-
ton legislator BY bringing the action upon that
particular libel, we will throw the whole subject open
without limit and not specifying the charge which
Mr. Greeley had fit TO make in other publications.
and throw the broad subject open upon the charge OF
corruption rs broad IA could be made, and give him
all the chance to prove any act OF corruption upon the
part OF Mr.. Littlejohn. But. now, gentlemen, we
have come here to try this acton and that the case
may be fully understood may be right and proper
that should at length state the grounds of the
defense, which they have set mp in their several
answers And II is Of some importance your Honor,
that L should state them here because, upon these
answers. the question OF testimony will mainly de-
pend; and the length or brevty of the cause which
about to try, will be measured The first
which they set up, call answer claiming the
muDication as "a privileged communication" for he
SAYS:
THE counsel here read the first answer from the
pleadngs
The first time may venture TO say that be ever
gave Democrat character superior 10 that OF
Wing or q Republican, whether true or false. That
we claim 10 be plea OF privilege and that IL question
for the Court solely to decide upon. know on
previous occasion on a motion in the matter 1t was
argued tha, was question for the jury, but conceive
however il is question solely for the court.
Nov for the fecond plea
There, I conceive, Is good and valid plea in this
case III they can search into the recesses OF Mr..
Littlejohns heart and fnd that his motive was cor
rup and find what his thoughts are and If he thought
corupty why then, they have made out their justin.
cation and not till then. And yet in relation to these
sne acts not renonstraDce was heard from the city
of New-York-these railroad acts dignhied by the
Hon. Horace Greeley a. the "Gridiron Railroads"
not remonsirance from the whole city Of New
York was ever heard against any one OF them There
were applications for numerous others ard often as
ngainst these but remembrance YVES heard though
indeed another Legislature has nteryened and though
Mr.. Littlsjohn hns been again the Speaker OF that
Assembly Yet no one remonsiTance against these
railroads hss been heard except through Horace
Greeley and his TRIBgsx. Now for the third Defense
They say:
[iho counsel read the third answer in pea1ings.l
Now, that we say is plea amounting In a wores
siuty 10 this: that the legislation was corrupt, and
AL we Intended to charge that there was there cor
rutt legi.lation not that Mr. Ltejoln was corrupt.
Now we bold that no evidence whatever can be given
10 show any such thing that. If that were so--if
evidence could be given as 70 these reports OF what was
done in tie Lobby why all the members Of the Third
House, there Horace Greeley himself included, might
be called up to testify what they old aud who they did
Il With who they paid money TO- whose influence trey
tried procure and what means they took 10 procure
H. You will see at once, that such thing could not
be done becAuse the Lesaureis not on Trial here Is
ia NJ Lit,leohn alone tina, is on tral-and the ques
ton ia, whether he Is g,ay II eo!fnP. i., iai,an
import i think the Counsel will not require that
should read IT. The fifth snswer says:
fThe Counsel read the fifth answer.
Now, under this state Of pleading, your Honor Will
Perceive at once the questions viii arise how far the
reputation Of any such thing any such charges could
he evidence or how the acts Of any other person than
Mr. Littleiohn can be evidence. Every person knows
low easy il ia TO get mp report OF corruption NO
man. your Honor man, gentlemen, kno ms that bet
ter than Horace Greeley himself; for no one among
YOU has probably forgotten the charge which was
made aRainst hiu--hOnest as be is-wllh having re-
ceived tribe at Washington for the purpose OF pass
ing certain corrupt there. No one has proba
bly forgotten the fact that he charged with re-
ceiying 900 check, aud Mr. Greeley ielt very In
dignant about it, and undertook 70 explain the matter
mud show that he received the check honestly. III
rennoton il enough TO make the standard Of charac-
ter the reputation which the honorable gentleman
there acquired might condemn lin. l speak OF 1t TO
low that mere reputation is not 70 take away the
character of any nan; and say that the rule OF law,
A 4. I'D Ls
State is no, to admit such testimony 10 he given and
thew used language Ike this III such testimony
were to be allowed and public report or reputation
being enough TO fix the charge-all that anybody
would have 10 DO 10 ruin another individual, would
be TO get Mp a report that he was 2uity OF certain
act and when lie was prosecuted Tor lhel, then lie
might give in evidence the very report which he had
him.ef created in order TO put the Other lndivldud
down." 49, 81.
have BEEN your Honor little more full 10 stating
there things, and ia stating the pleadngs, mat you
might zee and DO fnlly OF the klnd and character
OF the testimony which must be offered under sueh
sate of the pleadings We arc all aware that large
number Of the Witnesses are here-a large number
from Oswego, a large number, understand, from the
City Of NewYork, and number IRON thls place-ano
iudgng from the peadlngs, we can suppose thht the
line OF proof which will be attempted VIII be-hrst,
that there was such reputation, which we shall OBJ
ect to- of course next that there was reputation OF
corrupt egislatoni that we shali oIect 10 because
dor not teud TO convict Mr. Lulejohn. They viii
nitemut undoubtedly show that IN the procuring OF
these acts certain persons applicants and certain
other persons were stockholders, with view OF show
ing corruption in that matter 10 thst we ensi
object If they can show that DE Witt G. Lttlelohn
was sto kholier or show that he was corrupt, they
are at liberty TO do. But if your Honor, after review
Of the cases and law upon the subject sees that THIS
testimony is not proper then bring this case TO
sDeedy conclusion for it leaves them only one other
ground of defense, or at the most-one, to show
actual corruption in DE Witt c. littejohn, and the
otherbut in fact il is the only defense they can haVe
4. ta.Lh ta arpl