, 1866-10-11
THE GERRIT SMITH LIBEL
CASE.
Decision Of The United States Cir.
cult Court OIL Defendants
Demurrer.
Plaintiff advised ia Amend Els pcelor.
Aeion.

DErsNoNp- J.--1n the case Of Gc,rtt Smith
nsatnsl the TRIBUNE COMPANY, where q demur.
rcF to the declaration was in:crposcd and argued
Tie Other day, while we think that, perhaps, tech
ntcally, the demurrer must be overrulcd, e,ill we
ALEC think The plaintiff had better amend his de-
claraton. The main charge contained in the article
published In the Tn1BrEE Is. substantially, this,
looking at 1t in Its general scope and
tenor, that Mr. Smith, had been cuil,y Of some
acts which were attended, or might be attended
with danger to hin personally. and that Tor the
purpose Of avoiding that danger, he had fclgned
insanity. We are inclined to think that, although
the nature Of the acts which he performed Las not
been clearly Eet forth, md VIC cannot tell, there
fore, certainly whether those acts were abseaetly
right Or wrong. still the imrutatton against q
man that he had done something, the result OF
which was dangerous 10 himself personally,
and that he feigned insanity 10 avoid
that danger, Is calculated to bring him into
contempt and disgrace, and Il. therefore, techni.
csily, Ibellous. But The main charge that is con-
taincd In the article, We think had better Be set
forth In a colfoquium, IN such way that It may
be legally Ineligible, and Oh which proof can be
offered. II necessary. 1t is true, perhaps, that We
may personally know what Is meant; bu. we
donht, very mnch, II We can judeial!y take notice
Of whst Is referred to as having been done by
John Brown At uatper'e Ferry. twill bc:obseEved
that The language Of the alleged lbei Is Ibis:
his money sent John Brown to Eansss, and
helped him literally while there; perhaps also At
HArpet's Fe1J, though the latter has never been
proven. Yet on the a.reet or Brown, his tender
hearted financial patron became insane, Ned from
The wrath Of Buchanan aud the tlsvehu1dess,
when these ruled tho Government took refuge in
a Iunatic asylum and remained there uptl
Lincoln was iuaugusated." There Il sub
scquent statement IN the article to this effect:
alt Is not at all remarkable that lhts chicken
hearted peFEon who ngitates eouraeeonsly doc
s1Oes By many deemed dangerous, and then
wsthuraws to the insane asylum 10 avoid their
daugcrt-who oppopes al. government because 1t
intlcts punffhment in this world" &c. That Is
to be conuectcl4 VIC suppose, with the prccedn:
part Of the article, tho conclusion fso what te
stated before. Now, II Is tine, that there Is an
inAukado IN the declaration which states that the
aels Of John Brown were illegal and unlawful.
The lnnueudo, Il Is well kuown,
cannot enlarge the meaning Of the words,
but is merely TO give point and eject to IL With
ont going any further into tho case, have made
this statement as to the view Of the court With
the suggestion to the counsel. Undoubtedly the
charge that the plaintiff WAS concerned In John
Browns raid at uarper'e Ferry, and thcu 10 avoid
the dangers Of that act, feisncd insanity, would
be libcllous II 1t WAS stated with proper COLO
quinn, and It was untrue and We think 1t may
well he done BY The pleAder, and then he can con-
ncrt It With what Il stated afterwards. Therefore,
we think 1t would hardly be worth while for the
plaintiff 10 go 10 trial harlow an tssuc as Is
presented in the declaration ss II now stands
Time was given to the council Of the p1aintiS
10 determine whether OF not be would amend the
declaration.