New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1866-01-17
LAW INTRLLlGENCE.
The Sunday Mercury Libel suits-Pri'-
iIeaed Publications.
SUPERIOR COURT-TBnL TERN-JAS. lC.-beioro
Justice JONES.
John II. Mocabe agt William Caldwell and Horace r.

SUPERIOR COURT-TpnL TERN-JAy. lG-tetcro
Justice JONES.
John H. Mocabe ag. William Caldwell and Horace T..
Whitney.
This is an action for damages for all alleged
1 Of the ulainf by The Sunday Mercury. published in
Ocober 1862 Tie alleged lbel Is headed Social Life ir
JerseyA Methodist E1hoIe, Y paients" Se &C. and;
subsutay tha. Miss Mciyor had been few weeks before
arrested on complaint Of the plaintiff for letting hs houss
,cSrred charge against Mr. Mecabe before justice. !or
committing rope and that the Justice .s.aed warrant and
IA, hocabe wa, held 20 ball. that Thursday La; Mis-,
1Ivnr vent before the Grand Jury Of udson County and
related her story which M follows ~ uen wen on 10
tell her story, which was charge Of mhed s'dueton tas
tteped abortion and faise imprisonment IL ooneiuoed
ecsbe has underand been dismissed from the church
OF which he member The injured woman remains n
She intends to prosecute Meade and bring BIN to Just rri'
button This case will come on Tor t'la &c. &c, o dhe
plaintiff asked for this libel damages to the extent Of r. wv
mo defense sets up that every allegation in the LIBEL was
,ue them ty and IN nlitio o. dansses
ct up tks t the hae Of publication they believed 10 De
The pianiHs counsel in opening the ce,e ater aens ne
facts stated that the very fullest c1eninion 81
The gans, him. but that he had been Competed 70
come into here IN order that bis PANE sn De
oeo ,ions Iut were connected with him in business
william Yoan.blood the b0okAeePeI q The SaHess at1'
ir. Han admitted that the alleged libel was Published IN
The Sunday Mercury He was instructed 70 thans .le
men fox their advertisement and would admit mat au
very large circulation 70. weekly papci19.si ''' 49,"
thai the defendants 2s ind publ'hcrs . eo a.
Tho witness testified s Its circulation was nom ''o0' 70
5000. .,-.ua
MI Han nsn owed to dsmis, the compliant on me gonna
that srtics j.. face did not rive cause .e, Of
the greater part Of the article purpoIed 70 ce =.
VI he, occurred before certain ribuna one before
tie pescs and tie rest OF what was testified to ~ ~,
before the Crsnd Jury The interpreted rena' "eio NV
pty ss beion. aud no special damage wa, sseged ,u
Counsel proceeded TO discuss the various passpn' h
alleged libel the heading showed 70 he Guar digest o. ,ne
action Of the Courts there nothing ibeeus "a any view
iii it came the statement Of the story OF Mis-. Mcsoi
before the Grand jury. Now fherewa prooitst TIE sat
men was untrue unfair malicious, and the pablcao
being privileged the he plaintiffs Then the nna
causo stating that he dismissed from the church was ho
ibeous dismissal in itself sometimes honorable az
where clergyman dismissed honorsby to smother pansh
After considerable discussion the Court deciDod IN such
doubtful matter 10 take the from thu jury and s'aed
its impression waa that under the staire the bufoeh
proof that Il a fair report lay the deendants
Mr. Hall opened the behalf Of the defendants e
the jury lie charged that the Jury kept here by no
plaintiff and not by thenselvea He defended the hight
he ure,, 10 publish accounts Of such matters The ss
lie public press vas feared BY most sD than the act
! i&nb0IaVi y ssaiskUaal q W " ~ st'sg.