The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-12-12
LEGAL INTKL11aENoK.
The Libel se-COmmonvveaIth VI

lOWS.--
6entlemen ofthe Jury:--.As you have heard this rs
prosecution for libel. The indictment charges Ia
cember 1867, published in a certain Newspaper la this
City; called The StdGy Merc.ry. false aud m allcious
ASTney Of this county, sgsSinss the form Of the
the peace and dignity OF the Commonwealth. -
"a nssessSTg ~ al suSn eases for the jury to be
fIlsthnt T., he dsisndani published the article
second-That the matter he published was libellous.
yad IL 5eIerreS to she person and CON
1he Commonwealth is bound 20 make out all these
Ssy91d s % ss she de-
ID may be proper 10 remark that laws Furnishing
al Who have Valued the he Gearsctsf ets
siAnder any one particularly those IN authority was
expressly forbidden by the laws OF Moses. Tue
rulers and Legislators LORD Coke mSatio1s law OF
the sst eS 5 w6en IN t The e a9de.
and applaudeTs In the sar.p The lawn of the Per
esns cten:e Of S00n' and Of Rome all punished this
JuSIinian in his Institutes cassed libsls amongst
private injuries OF the highest degree.
King Alfred commanded that the forger OF slandsr
II by the price OF head and though the sew Srity Of
s1cn p punishmsnts MS was Ia tim mitiga,ed the ofense
The req on given ior this is, 'that the effect o,
libel is n twofod damage-a damage to public order
BY provoking private contentious. Technically termed
dual in his cha racter and credit" - NN'''
voEes breach Of the public Soe that he sav59 pro
THE greater the truth the greater the libel" has
thai the public peace may be equally interrupted by
The provocaiio1 Of libel whether the subject matter
II is however useless in the present case for US to
ss not offered to prove truth OF the chSgss con
POSITION eniirey dsrent utteTly deSyne Sap upon
intended 10 point 10 the District Attorney or indeed
ilmey be Interesting, however for Us to know that
Mhe me remarks OF SenerS, Aamiton and y. 8
Groswell; for libel on the President Of the United
In the State of New York, perming the truth 10 be
gwen In ridence in sucn cases and while Kentucky
the same princpls the state OF Pennsylvania was the
first TO take this step for the security Of the Liberty OF
Passing from the consideration of these general
matters, let us direct attention to the especial
elements of this prosecatlon:- ~
First, then, as to the tact OF publication.
Of the proprieors and publishers OF the paper Ia
Byrnes has proven that he bought Of the papers
containing this article at the Office of the Sunday
'i Mf. Charles s. Wilson says that he was employed
paper and tha. he has seen Mr Meeser At the office
day Mercury, and that the deendant is one OF the
Mr. j. hn w. Frazier, the United states Assessor.
and General A. l.. Msgilton prove that the Go era
ment tax s assessed and paid in the name Of William
Mr. William F. Feuton, OF the Ledger Office. proves
and Ss
In the Of he a assn
The Witnesses for the defendant also connect him
sume--houEh this is entirely for y0u@thst the aeRs
!on that the Defendant Is ons OF the propretOrs is
the fact thEt others may be in partnership with
The second point which It is necessary for the
Commonwealth TO establish is. that the article pub
malicious p16lcstoS expressed either IN p1ns pr He
either to injnree society generally: 90 6lackes
one pose him public hs,red q
or Tdcule" Our statute upon this subjec: deoares3
exhibit any malicious or defamatory libel tending
the OF one Who Sve sNd wnO .bsre Is dead Or
pose lin TO public hatred contempt rldicpIe sucn
vieion be punished as therein directedH
Yen Will therefore see that upon this branch of the
Gle was aiicoGs calculated 10 6iacFen the
public hatred. contempt. or ridicule.
tom g mes directly Within these deSton oa ~ H6es- e
II is said thati charges the District Attorney with
him mp 70 public hatred, shame reproacn, and ridi,
SG al onb tSH 5e Of sct me- Sh hs SS
this ike all the other questions IN ths cGse, Is a
therefore, be necessary for you TO consider charges
Il speaks OF the deeds of person referred to- and
say that none of them was good-that of plan
sue6 are Incident to the life of an unscruonIons
pociaD had stamped upon his face look OF ma
il charges him as used to decePton-as having lost
person down and thrust him into PRISON cell for
twenty yeaTs-as having been rough-as having
learned the law that he might eyade It, It adds that
ne S pfn a h% S S
as being chastsed by her relative for the ndientv
rs m Ss o as 6aSs been
with the sutler OF his regiment having made ali the
care TO resign ana come home as soon as there was
ffyou believe that these and the other parts OF the
article in queslion come within the definitions OF
libel, len have given TO you ana that t was ma
llcious. and WAS published by the dsfendant-you
S tSeR 10 %hSh have called your attene he 'SEd 9
Does this article allBde 10 Q person. and does IL
convey the insnuations charged in the nd'ctment?
The publication Ia question refers 20 person styled
therein as the Honorable William Bill mRn. as RfFrI-
bnDe OF PniiadslPhis as having an otdGe as wanting
the right hand as being lawyer, a man OF authority
belonged to the I'd Regiment of Pennsylvania Re-
The Commonwealth charges that these and other
matters OF description point 70 the with
snch Certainty TO leave reasonable doubt IN the
pI pIosecuior' that heW as the person. NA'" '"e
In support Of this allegation, hey have called
Cassiday, Phillips, oByrne Brooke, Nayior, Esing'
J Esber, Heisler, Barlow, Sterr, Berry, Redhefsr,
Given. Cochran, Moore, Nnnes Chipman, Walker,
man Naule have been examined upon his point.
These witnesses state that they have known Mr..
them have known him from soyhood, and ali with
more or less dstinctness say that they understand
The defendant, on the othe- hand. contends that
this publication did not allude TO Mr. Mann that IL
mere of fiction innocent In us design aud harm
10 SUPPORT this view of the case he has called A. r.
FIl who says that the grester part Of .hs article
that il was sent the ofiice here by MALL that the
writer did not know Colonel Mann bis antecsde9tS
tor ana bad reference 70 Mr. Mann or TO any one.
ace from the Post Office and be has given yoU the
account OF what he Afterwards sa" In she defendants
They have also urged, With great ability. that
there wss absence OF all malice tbat tue publica-
on was in the regular OF business, that the
liberty OF III press is be preserved invoate, and
u At for all thee reasons the defendant Is entitled 70