New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-09-20

1
entitled 10 recover, be ause they were not within any
such privilege. The Court, In ri Sing the Gaze TO the
Jury told them they mst take thee hbes themselves
and discriminate with regard to what PORTION OF them
came within just defLitiOu Of lesitYate criti len,
aud that which without the bounds VI just crii-
cism and wss d-famaiory, injurious ard lbeous IN lie
character. That well illustrates csss al cases
wurfe the Jury arc indeed the judges, and should
Ilghtully be tie sole Judges Ut the Character Oi the
li6elOus charge alleged.
But Ia iblr care, gentlemen, was obliged 10 make
ruling in order to determine what the Issues 10
lie tried, aid IN order TO confne tie proof 10 what
fairly triabe before yeu, aud obliged myself to
give sIrue,ion to Il lsBgu re Of q Is lbei; and
gave that ton TO 1t in hch laid down the rule
that the libel imputed personal corruption To the a
Till and thai any proof ou'sie OF that wac irrelevant
prOt, aud therefor not admissible. say Obliged
10 make that ruling; tor tue c,re Was Que which
in thy JUDI called for it, and, having made that
ruling IL is TO DO taken the Lac OF the case uow
and to be- held as the law throughout. Now, that
ruliag may have been erroneous, AMI all wrong; and
il yer, likely that, having begun with this error,
uay have toiIered continuously but there is great
sati faction IN knowing tht this wrong II IL be sucb
is not rr, pura le, aud will not njurously affect the
defendant ia this case; Tor, happily there is auO her
tribunal, Which reyises all my errorr-all errors con-
United ia the Circn, In the haste IN which are
tried there and IN tie alb euce OF all neeGul deli era
tion-a tribunal that sits Ia calm judgment all these
G. ses and rights the wrong wlere II EXISTS; or II II
d not exs'. airms the ruling Therefore, Gentle
men, there viii be Ipottuni hereafter TO correct
there errors Into which may have fallen, a. the a.
feudaut will be deprived Of 30 just night which per-
tau, 20 Lin in thai regard. That being tie Gaze the
first proposition OF law which l have to lay down
"a this:
First, The Court having rued that tire alleged libel
cnitsiped charge OF pc sontl corruption, Tie jury
Will receive this as the construction of tho language
ana consequently that tie words are IN law ibeious
You will take that, Gentlemen, the ruling OF tie
Court ia thu ease. TIE construction ] give "a the
words l. that il impuies charye OF personal corrup
.i.k.. in
Won from the duty If CONSUMING IL for yours lye-
IS coHd. libel is willful and mali ious pu"lica-
ton concerning another; but malice So ia rs tue law
- mir, IL To rurlain the action, Is I'M Ned from the
uubh,ariol of that which is untrue; tue law pre-
aiming il 10 exist In such care Therefore eZp'ess
q0if,s Is not Iequi ed ,urtan the action; blt this
presumption may W nPelled By circumstances that
tend TO ii-Iroyeit
Nov. In this, Iout know but may DO supposed
20 run ounIer 60 de- ision VI the Court OF Appeal
ia The ,a-e Which my attention Was called Ill do,
shall be found ~ be IN error tut nave always sup
uosed that was ID true proposition in law iron tue
ca hest day ia which NY atleDnOn rs student was
ever allied 10 the la HppertaiDng 10 tbel nd Islander.
And ahOu, Judge Stlden seems to Imagine sort of
ua ginary aud ai,euuaIed lice between u lice tn Ia"
and malice in fat yet nave always undersoJd TIE
Law 10 Dr tbaI from the ial,iy Vi the publication,
malice Is iml he'd thodgh IL may not in pOisi oi fct
exist beau IMAM l. at liberty to publish any thing
but the TRUTH aud H. he publishes tnat Wi Is not
true tue tact IF uDtrulb, III the Law, Implies malice
the publ aivu. IL Ii very true that Ia that case
Jadgu Seldrn htJ that the ersnce OF TIE law did bot
exlsi; and the reason was thai il Was privileged
communication. II | bad held In this case that
the lu Ii ~ on here privileged tbeL the Inference
OF the law wOull have been disl iceO u would not
b we existed IN that cise Ia the Court OF ApPsls,
tue ooIInani aiiJn war privileged one and g. ereo
il protected prfna Jir'', AID TIE piintiii was
Obliged show, IN der TO maun his sction, that 81
was Uttered maI,iVusiy. becau,e al hOugh when
patty bas & truth YET II " sei oa Ell by uHili
10 that rrrd Ia. s s'I liable To be prosecuted and pay
dAu.aeee. lac pays them IA thai care lie fu e ne IL
nc uIrd by mali iJus motives extending beyond tie
tnrr,. fsri o puLhs ~ that whlen Is uOt true Thai
ptopOsi,iun ten, u toe law, with L lay down for
your guiJance that tie law impe The publication 10
lie maieJ.s II II he uHrue AID Ia tbls ease Tie de-
faudaa sauGily unjnsfrd, aud the imputiii"n being
one Il persons cUrfuytiOn and there teing no pruoi
that there personal corruption, the nlesaon h an
untrue allrga ioni thereloe BY law !. inplediy
III .licious.
Tsi,d Home by mistake, or inadverteucA, or want
Of ,utfrient know ledge publ-b-s libel, tie law i'm
pue. malice ouy Tar to make him liable or surn
camAg,s ss tie Jury may deem reasonable under all
the c rogu.Babcee of tie cAse.
bin li.hls Tor damages which may seem reasonable
They may he nominal damages, lnsI according to tue
d cum, tapcrs, there being noih toenlaHe mem 70
any aggravated degree, aud this covers That class oi
eascs.
Foartk But there may exist actual msl co In the
rupO-e aud spirit Of the author OF the puOtationi OF
there ma, be entire ab,ence u Date gu hir part,
both subjects Of proof ouiside oil the mere fses
Of publication.
Now III. p ,intif may prove exprers malioei be may
prove that tbs party hn, ssid, 81 will publ such ali
sri e against such mAn; ] mean to follow lim ny
aud have vengeance Hxbinst him-l VIII have u.
ENpre.sions of that kind indicaIIDg pur, ore aud
sIiit and intent To n1ict All injury or ut all events
that the party Is not actnsied by All Innocent purpose
and that be does sct by inadvotence or through
ustake-that IL IL not an error OF Judgment or O lu-
fumati,n but that il Is "a deliberate design TO Dtid
al injury and that be res about preparing the means
by winch the injury l. To be Inflicted On the
oiher hand there may be reriect absen'e VI malice
Their. NAV be- no thought Of i'll will and purpoe 10
iniuru but SIMPLY what he thnks 20 be true,
with a motive which 10 him 10 justify ii or
that 10 ssems TO be called upon by some great public
exigeDcy TO utter what be thinks )nst anu fiShIi
though Il may be- mistaken untrue. aud fase. yet he
ha hOt the and the purpose 10 intld an In
Jury; thereiors be has no actual malice IL the 'a.s
Fra II actual malice is shown " EXIT, Il VIII Dol
protect oIe who ha, published that which "a prind
ficrS ibelous although without this tie publication
wonl be privileged, or even jnsiihs6le
Tnis is ouly repeating wuai said IN more specific
form. Wherever you show actual mhli lie you deprive
the party OF any stif alton he had by reason OF the
k,ct that what be said WAS privileged; because II u
man will say what ia privileged, wrh u wicked and
malicious 4 urposc it does not excuse him
Strth, II the plaintiff las proved here the exist
ence Of actual malice that may be considered oy the
Jury In sggrayaion of damages, ana those OF Puhl-
tive character may be given
And thai /, the only case In which punitive dam
ages can 10 bad bat only thoee which naturally How
from tie uttsral &C of libel. II 10 whore mall Ous
,hara, ter stamps the publication that you can 20
beyond the ordinary character Of damages and give
thoso which are called punitive" or sometimes
vindietive, which Is not good term.
SepenM II, Oh the other hand the defendant has
satisfied tie Jury that be not sctuated 10y malice,
but puLll.hei what be did without any malicious mo.
tive aud believing il 10 DO true, that Is 20 he con dored
by the Jury and will mate ri.y mitigate The dAmg's
That 10 contrary tsct, aud it reduces the DAMAGES,
II the defendant shows that he actuAtsd by good