Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-03-21
A "BaId' Case smissed-HmPOrtT
ant 10 Hotel Clerks and ESrOPrie-


Judge Storer disposed of the case of
Benson v. Capt. Miller, in the absence OF
counsel He stated that MIR. John 5. Ben
son, the plaintiff, came to this city from
New York to transact certain business, the
nature of which he did not specify; that
he put up at the Burnet House, and depos-
tied his money and certificate of deposit
with the clerk. The clerk by some means
lost or mislald this certificate of deposit,
and was unable to produce it when called
for. Not being Endorsed, 1t was OF no value
to any one but the owner, yet the plaintiH
demanded payment for it from the pro-
Drietor of the Burnet House, which was re-
fused. Afterward, the plaintiff alleges,
Capt. Miller, the proprietor of the Burnet
House, accosted him in a loud and bolster
Gus manner atthe counting room desk, and
asked of him how much money he had, IN
such way as to intimate to the 6ystanders
that he did not believe plaintiff had any
money; thus injuring his credit. After
ward the clerk of the hotel spoke to him In
the rotunda of the building, and asked him
if he was the man who had lost money
and that he, too, by his manner and looks,
implied thathe Hd not believe plaintiff was
possessed of any means; thereby damaging
his business credit before all and sundry
persons present in the hotel. Concelving
then that the Burnet House was not a pro-
per place for him to stop, he removed his
lodging to the Walnut Street House. There
he found evidence that his credit was injur-
ed, tor he was again subjected to suspicion
as to his ability to pay, the proprietor de-
manding of him some pledge for the pay
ment of his bill. In all these matters the
plaintiff claimed that he had suffered dam
ages, and for this cause he brings suit Tor
Injury to his reputation and character to
the amount of $4,000, in addition to hiss suit
to recover the amount of his certificate OF
depositl -r..
Judge Storer remarked that this was GER
tainly the baldest case ever presented to
Court. The plaintiff admits that he suffer-
ed no actual loss of money, but that by be-
ing compelled to stay here and prosecute
the case he incurred expense. and especially
that he suffered damage from the implica-
tfons made by the words, manner and looks
of these several hotel propretors and clerks
that he was man of no means.
1t was not usual to make any allowance
for damages, the Judge stated, in cases OF
trover, unless there was evidence of fraud.
In this case it was simply alleged that the
plaintiff lost by incurring expenses in pros
ecutiug his suit. His Honor was aware that
a great many curious things were done in
that city, but if this is specimen OF their
causes Of action he was prepared to receive
new sensation of astonishment in the
wonders wrought therein. He would dis
miss the case. ..E
1t was not really set for trial, but came
up on motion to amend the petition. The
time for amending had passed, and that of
itself would have dismissed it.
From this decision it may be considered
as safe hereafter for hotel proprietors and
clerks to insinuate publicly, and even to
look as if they did not believe their guests
were possessed of means, if, in their iudg-
ment, the circumstances warrant such a
suspicion. Cincinnati Gazette.