The New York herald., 1869-03-03

PENDANTS in these criticisms II they honestly and
fairly believed this book was bad book, tney were
Justified and the jury nuss so 1ind But they shoud
show that lhls was privileged communication one
TACT would clearly show. Both the publishers OF the
Arrosv and Afta7stc had sent them the publication
with the request please noice.n Such request,
aside from the press liberty brought Il within tne
rule OF ''privilegeu connunicat0nsn They should
SHOW thar none these defendants had any personal
dislike malice to Mr.. keade. but on the contrary,
had great admiration for him. No damage WAS
shown, no lessening OF the sale Of the book. They
already had the fact OF sale OF $4,000 OF the book,
and another publisher had sold $4,000 OF an ex-
purgaed edition. Mr.. sewell spoke Of the letter
subsequently, written bv Mr.. Keade (the "prurlent
Prude' letter. and claimed that TINS criticisms had
been sought, knowing that they must be adverse,
and the letter written TO increase and stimulate the
sale of the book, the letter having been kept back
TIL the book was ready to be launched In book
FORM Mr.. heade, doing his business as an author In
London asked jury 1900 miles away TO protect him
IN his occupation. Mr. Lard might as well bring
suit Tor Criticisms on the Alabama. or the Wne-
growers OF Cadiz for criticisms on Cadiz wines.
They should give evidence TO show that the book
was IN part plagiarized, one speech being almost
should show that tine Erening Post conceded IN
their views. MIR. Sewel concluded his opening with
an eloquent appeal to the jury Tor the liberty oi the
press.
Tne testimony Of the defendant was commenced
by reading Mr.. Sweetzer's testimony to the effect
that ne had been informed by one Of the editors Of
the Sunday Aercufv that "Grftith Gaunt" hao been
offered TO them and had been rejected because they
An article in the Euenfng Post OF the Goth Of June
wes offered In mitigation OF damages, ana, after
Wikle Collins story, included in the "Queen Of
Hearts,n called "Brotner Grifnth's Story" was
offered In evidence TO show that the plot Of 'GrI,
fth Gaunt' was plagarized from II, but was ruled
out
..Grinlth Gaunt," the book, was put in evidence.
ment,n was offered In evidence TO show that Mr..
Reaue had no rule OF morals in taking the plots OF
other authors for his USE and tnat his principle
was .sequity or spoliatlon,n and to show that Mr.
Reade's reputation for originality Was already tar
nished. The Court oyerruled tue OFFER holding that
hal lI,olf ri fcna MIR nm
MIR. Sewell urged In mitigation OF damages that
these books should be admitted as admissions by
Mr.. Reade that his character OF creative artist Tor
the injury to which ne complained, was not SO hign
as he claimed
MI. Gerry argued that this attack was utterly in
Mr.. justice Cerke SAID nothing was more common
than for authors to borrow their plots from other,
and especially foreign authors Shakespeare himself
had thus taken the plot OF his plays from stories
then afl0at. and such course was not considered
dlshonorable. Plagiarism was the taking bodily
without acknowledgements portions OF o her PERSONS
writing. II they could show Mr. Reade had done
SO they might introduce the proof -
permitted to put In the book ana read from pages
2l9 and IS, to show Mr.. Reade's opinion OF the I'M
p0rtance Of plot, and other pages TO show that he
admitted having taken plots from other sources than
his own.
Howel's State Trials to show that the lawyers
speech in chapter forty three, Of "Grifth Gaunt,
was bodily taken from it, This was ruled out as the
Mr. Whitney then onered "The Prurient Prude"
letter published in october, offering 1t as an admis.
sion Of Mr.. Reade. that his novel was not at for
young persons. Judge Clerke admitted the whole
paper.
Rlchard Grant White was called and testified that
he was an author BY profession, and had practiced
that profession for seventeen years. The employing
by authors OF others aid them is not unusual Such
acusom prevailed from the time Of Shakespeare down.
Shakespeare himself; 10 did Beaumont and Fletcher.
Sir Walter Scott 10 said to have been 80 aided.
Dumas also; and Mr. Anthony Trollope 70 said TO
have part OF his works written In this way.
CrOss-examined-Mr. White had been contrtbu-
tor to the Atlantic Monthly prior to 1860, not since;
this book Is one OF the best works Of Mr. Reade there
is none as literary work stands higher; witness had
never heard any other opinion OF 1t In the literary
Q. What Is Mrs Henry Woods character in the
literary wOrld2
This question raised long discussion, ct the close
OF which Judge Clerke adjourned the trial TO Wed
nesday ct 10 A. NJ, without deciding the question.
Mr.. Gaatin, Mr.. E. I. Gerry and Mr.. Booth for
plaintin.
Mr. whitney, Mr.. Dimock and Mr.. Robert Lowell
for the defendant