The New York herald., 1869-03-04
SUPREME COURT CIRCUIT.
Tho Reade-Sweetzer Libel suIt-Ciosing
shc Testimony-A Wrinkle About Nov
Writers.

The Reade-Sweetzer Libel suIt-CIosing Of
shc Testimony-A Wrinkle About Novel
Before Judge Cerke.
Charles Rsdde rs. Charles II. Stceetxer.- The hear
ing OF this case was resumed yesterday morning at
the sitting Of the court, the room being densely
crowded. An article published m the Round Table
october 1s, 1863, entitled rhe English Bullyn being
comments upon the plaintiffs letter on "Prurient
Prude.n
r. II. Stoddard was examined, ana stated that he
had been engaged In literary pursuits for about
twenty years. lie said there was custom among
authors to employ assistants In their productions.
In some cases the name OF the more eminent author
only was put on the title page and In some cases
both names. The allegation that an author had
done so would IN some Instances be damaging to
the author, and In others might not. With regard
to novels 1t would be difficult question to answer
but on the whole ne considered It would not be dam
aging.
had not written any novels but had written several
Henry sedley testified that he was the present edi-
tor OF The Round Taoie; followed the profession Of
stories; was acquainted with the custom OF writers
Of prose VINO employed assistants IN writing stores
he knew that such a thing had been done, and that
the imputation OF having done 30 would. in some
cases. be damaging; as TO how long the custom had
prevailed ne Won say " existed y = iew years; sucn
general opinion In the literary world; he had been
told In London by persons cOnversant with the facts
that Dickens had employed persons; one OF those
CHRISTMAS stories was so written, for one of the
writers Of the Christmas stories had told him he was
the writer.
Richard Grant White was next examined, and In
reply to question asking what WAS Mrs. Henry
Woods reputation as an authorcss In the literary
world, he said he knew nothing OF her personal repu-
tation as an auh0ress; heard that her general repu
tation was that OF person who wrote sensational
novels which were Objectionable on the point Of
taste rather than In point OF moral; but he knew
nothing Of her: heard nothing against her; said he had
read Griffth Gaunt" that he knew Its circulation In
families as he knew the circulation OF books gene
given to his wife and sister TO read alter having
carefully read II himself. -
Daniel s. Syme stated that he had published "Grif
nth Gauntn two DAYS after II was published by Tick
nor Fields; that he sold CO. 00o-a circulation never
before cqualled by novel IN his recollection the
sidered good; one novel by Miss BraddOn had had
large circulation, but he did not think as large NJ
this
Gross examined had taken his copy from
the Atlantic Monthly: he had paid nothing for II.
DEFENDANTS then offered In evidence the New York
letter and the announcement OF the publication on
that day OF the novel.
TINS closed the case for the defendants
The plaintiffs then put the article In the Round
Table Of October Is lSG6, headed IAN English
Mr. whitney then addressed the Jury for the de-
fence. He read the Objectionable portions OF the
book In question and also the three articles pub
lished In the Round Table. He contended that the
book exactly what the editor Of the Round Table
claimed II was In those articles. He concluded by
submitting THAI the book was immoral, and that the
criticism was fully jnstinable.
At this stage Of the proceedings the case was ad
j0urned ~ tnls morning.