The Daily empire. (Dayton, Ohio) 1865-1867, 1866-05-14
bAw RnPoRN
I 'linig,L gsENrUDf
sorEaion couht'NltnoK nAYNFs,

JohR BedsoA W, Dacid Rees.--An action
of slhndcr IN which the plaintiif hyVrre
that on the 9TH day VI January, A, n. SBa
The dciendant falsely, mallciously and with.
out probable cause, said OF the ualntlIl,
| YOU are y dz7sl thlcf;you stole NY goods I
~ s9oSN SnISn ,ISnaaS asalSSdfrruF matter he claimed
The defendant admitted saylug tho word.
against the plaintiff, aud Plead his justln-
cation upon The grounds that p,ainglfl, for
ten months previous, had been IN hie em-
ploy as lourncyman tailor NJ his store IN
tatmervillel that while In his employ ~
such he missed goods of various drscrlp-
tions aud found them worn hy nelghbofs
aud customers, who Informed defendant
that they had purchased them of plaintiff;
that when .plalutilf was accused or taking
The goods, he stated that he had purchased
the sanle ~ Dayton at certain stores and
auctlop tooNN bpt vohld rlFcno satlsfao-
tory eNplahatloh A. ID wliere aud how he
came Into their possession,
From all these circumstances. defendant
averrcd that he believed the accusatinns TO
he true and acting under such belief he
uttered the 'wcrtls against the plaintiff rs
alleged IN the petition,
The production of the testimony cccu-
pied three days aud the Court was ne.
quested to Charge the Jury proyious 10 the
argument. Aln Riviar ahc ehargc. the Court
held that In an action of SANDER lmputing
crime, the very fact that crime has been
imputed to the plaintiff, Is actlonhhe Ut
ITSELF aud Il sufficient ground for maln-
taininH an action In such ease however
the defendant may plead tho truth OF the
sanuerous matter rs Justification In
sNatginR the plaintiff With such crime.
Ihat there are certain cases IN which 4 de-
tondant Is iustiiled under oartaln Cirruni-
stances, IN making such deelafatiohs.
The mct that the plaintiff was IN the em-
ploN OF the defendant ~ a iourneyman tai
loE that defendant had missed his goods
aud having 50 missed his goods, and had
good reason TO believe aud I'D believe that
plaintiff had stolen those goods. hc had a
fight to accuse him OF their then OF con
vcrslon aud assign this rs reason thr dis
charging the plaintiff from his further cm-
ploy, lfdctendant however had no reason
TO believe the accusations to he true the
declarations become malicious and he Is IL
able ~ damages, TbrJnry nlist lock at all
The Mcts To determine this question: aud the
Information upon which defendant found
cu MS belief must be of n reasonable char
actcr aud such as 10 convince reasonable
man that such accusations were true; aud
U. true defendant had the right under such
circumstances tu make the aossusatinhs and
refuse To- settle With plalntla on this no.
ronnt II otherwise thcn the defendant Is
liable, fFb.f Hf
Speaking false words lmplies p,alcc, aud
the Jury may view the inanuur vi which the
wonls were spoken. lf under all the cir
cumstanccs the Jury are satisfied that plail,-
tit was guilty of those accusations, then
defendant was Justified IN making them--or
II he had reasonable grounds OF suspicion,
or " the defendant had reasonable grounds
for believing thrm to be true, whether true
or ialsc, undcr the circumstances he slustl.
lied IN making the accusations, lf tho Jury
iind the circumstances to he ut u Iustifying
character then the manner IN which the
words were spoken are mmatcrlal, Upon
the charge of the Court by agreement OF
Counsel the case was submitted without ar-
gument and the Jury, afler being out a
short time returned verdict In flvor bfthe
til, Houk 4 MMahon for defendant.