The Portland daily press., 1867-10-17

The LAW OF MERCANTILE AGENCIEs-An
important decision has recently been rendered
by Judge Nelson of the District Court of New
York which will render it necessary for mer-
camille agencies to change their manner of do
ing business in order to render it an entirely
safe one. An Ohio merchant sued MIR. Tap
pan, the proprietor OF mercantile agency in
New York, to recover damages for SANDER.
The ground upon which the action proceeded
was that representations had been made to the
customers of the defendants agency injurious
ly affecting the plaintiffs standing as a mer-
chant. The jury gave the plaintiff verdict for
$4,000, and it was on motion for a new trial
that Judge Nelson gave the following deci-
sion: .ft $ f. t.,sss.4
The defendant resided in New York and
had established IN that city mercantile
agency, the object OF which was to procure in
formation Of the pecuniary ability and stand
lag OF merchants in the country for merchants
in the city, to be communicated to the latter
in confidential manner. The defendant had
some twenty clerks who participated in the
business of the establishment, and were of
courses privy to the information obtained,
whether favorable or unfavorable, to the char
acter and credit OF the country merchant; and
who participated in the communications of the
information to their customers or customers
clerks. The defendant communicated through
his clerks to several customers and to their
clerks facts seriously affecting the credit of the
plaintiffs house; and the main question in the
case, on the merits, is whether or not he is ex-
empt from the consequences of the publication
on the ground of its privileged character. The
Court charged the jury that if the defendant
himself had communicated the information to
a person applying to him for the papers in
good faith, the communication might have been
privileged one; but that the publicity Civ
en- to it by recording the libelous words in a
book, to which others had access, and to whom
| they were communicated, though standing in
| the. relation of clerks deprived the commune
cation of its otherwise privileged character
This is no doubt very important question
and involves in its practical operation, which,
ever way it may be decided, interests of very
great magnitude. On the other hand, to le-
galize these establishments in the manner and
to the extent used by the defendant is placing
one portion of the mercantile community un-
der an organized system of espionage and in
QUESTION for the benefit of the other exposed
from the very nature of the organization to
perversion and abuse; and on the other to re-
| fuse to legalize them may be restricting iniu-
| rlously the right of inquiring into the charac-
ter and standing of the customers asking
for credit an his business transactions. We
| are strongly inclined to think if the estab-
| lishments are to be upheld at an, the limita-
tion attached to them by the Conrt below is
not unreasonable, to wit, that it must be an in.
dividual transaction, and not an establishment
conducted by an unlimited number of partners
and clerks. tH f
The principle upon which privileged comlnu-
nications rest, which, of themselves, would
otherwise be hbelous. imports confidence and
secrecy between individuals; and isineonsst-
ent with the idea of a communication made by
a society or congregation of persons, or by !,
private company or corporate.body = .
The case is to be carried up to the Supreme
ga ED Il.