Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1872-02-22
THE LIBEL SUIT.
VIM Prince ~. The Evening Star.

BINARY VERDICT.
II e case OF Wn. Prince rs. The Evening
Star Newspaper Company, before Judge Mac
Arthur--in which plaintiff claims SO 900 dam
ages-wss continued yesterday after our report
concluded. Nr. T.. e. Darlington having con
cluded his argument for the prosecution, Mr.
Francis Miller followed for defence, and exam
ined the case in the light of the law, and con
tended that there was nothing in the decla alton
and the evidence submitted 10 the jury to
thorize any damages whatever. Mr.. Riddle
continued on the same side, a. follows:
ARGUMENT OF HON. A. q. RIDDLE.
May II please the Court, and you. gentlemen
OF the jury: L am aware that this investis alton
to-day has been somewhat tedious, and yet am
disposed 10 ask your attention for few moments
longer, while offer some further views on the
side OF the defense.
/ was going TO say word about the case itself
or my estimate Of it, but you will make up your
own opinion. You, of course do not care much
what i say about it, for I only express my ia,li
viGual opinion. Iou take your estimate OF the
case from the witnesses, using YOUR good sense
and your everyday experience, tand some OF
you have had great deal in the affairs of life,
and you are az well Calculated, after hearing
the testimony, TO come to a correct conclusion
as, perhaps you wi he after we shall have spent
two or three hours more IN making eloquent
speeches about it. For, after all, it is a little
thing: IL is among the small things, and per
maps there Is nothing more in licative of mans
ability to make great speech, than to find HIM
making it; an eloquent and lengthy speech out
OF nothing. shall not attempt it. Nor shall
attempt 10 make any extended reply to the able
argument OF my distinguished friend, General
Darlington. Not because ] feel a want OF
proper respect for him and his effort, but
| am rather disposed to leave this case
with you after few suggestions, and the
argument which will follow for the plaintiff.
Now, We dOnor underestimate the value of pri-
Iate reputation. Do not think for a moment
that We are here to jeer at that. Some OF III
have not ANYTHING else, and when you think
little about that, you will find, doubtless that
our estates are perhaps not very large, for We
may not have much OF that But whether il l.
much, or little, il Is ours. We do not care about
having our reputation trified with, nor do We
intend 10 tritie with the reputation OF others II
does not require of one of our citizens growing
up under the healthful influence of our civilic
zation-it does not require any elaborate analy-
sis to how that mans reputation is of great
value TO him. Ii is one of those beautiful things
sTringing up way back in his boyhood, and
growing up along with him to manhood: and a.
he comes up it grows up also with him, until il
comes TO be part of him, and frequently the
best part Of him. And when man has reached
the ripe age, and with a good reputation, why
annihilate him. Why, do we hold this thing
that we call good reputation by 80 slender a
tenure? Is ii soseasily demolished that a good
natured paragraph in little matter OF pleas
anty, or badinage in a newspaper, blows il all
TO pieces, leaving nothing in the world of the man
but SIC, COO in damages? Why, gentlemen, where
have we got our notions of reputation and OF
its value? But, will say no more about that.
Nor, gentlemen, do ask license, as we say, for
newspapers. They have come to make up with
us in this country very large element. They
are useful to us. need not enlarge upon that.
Every American citizen understands exactly
their value. They are not perfect. They share
the ordinary imperiections OF our common law
here. They are not bt tier, and neither are they
worse. But they are a conce ntration and mani
festation of human skill, ingenuity and labor in
a given direction that is very valuable and very
useful to us. And we only ask in this instance
that You should extend to them Just the same
rule you would ask for yourselves You would
not like man to go DIGGING along after you
with a writ in his hands 10 see where you sneak
word here, or drop one there, and il does not
make any difference whether it is written or
printed, so tar as the view am now taking OF it
Is concerned. Nor isit very commemorate, or
healthful process by watching newspapers, to
see whether, OF not, one has not Inadvertently
undesgnediy, accidentally made some state
m Ient that somebody may miseonstrue or
ference, gentlemen, between a matter of
coed natured badnage in a newspaper, and a
deliberate and malicious libel. You can tell in
a moment soon as your eve falls upon a par
'gTaph. In a libellous article you will ind
there is in il the animus charging a man with a
crime. Some moral derelictiOn; want of some
good quality, or a surcharge OF some bad quality,
that makes the man offensive and Objectionable.
and holds him up TO reprobation; and ii false
and written and published with the intention OF
iriuring the man, il is libellous. Newspapers
have right to indulge in that class of articles
at all against anybody. Ii they do, let them be
sued 1t is grave matter. IL seriously in
wolves some questions worthy to be considered
by a jury. But. do submit, gentlemen, where
you find an article simply of the character of
this, in which there is no obvious intention to
njure anybody, il cannot be held to be libel
CuS. His Honor will tell you, if he troubles you
at all " 18th his matter, that two three things
are necessary to constitute a libel, to make a
man responsible. In the first place, it must be
false, and II must be published with the inten-
ton to lnJure; and even that, If your Honor
please, docs not constitute a libel. There NAV
he scores OF articles published that are both
false and malicious, and vet not libellOus, for
they must charge a man with something in or
der TO be libellOus. They must charge him with
some crime, some moral turptude; hold him up
to ridicule, contempt, and derisiOn; bring upon
him Obloquy, or infamy, or ridicule. So that
there must be these three qualities. The libel
lous article must be false. Ii must be malicious
turpitude, or hold him up to ridicule scorn,
infamy, or derisiOn. These three ingredients
must in some way enter into a libel, and with
out the attendance of all three there never WAS
libel in the world.
/ ask the Court to charge that TO the iurv, and
Therefore refer it to the court. The little have
TO say about il, gentlemen, will be with the abso.
lutte certainty that the Court will 50 instruct
you. Now then, what have 10 ssy about this
article is that neither of these three qualities
that have spoken of attends it, In short that
this article is not hbellOuS at all. But that is
question which. under the rule, will have to be
referred TO the jury, suppose.
Gentlemen, with what does this article charge
MI. Prince? Does il charge him with any OF
fence? None at all. Does it charge him with
any degree OF turpitude" No. Does IL say that
he has injured anybody? Not at all. Does it
No. What does itsay? Why. il says that lady
unknown to him called at his place of business
and left. and that after she left he discovered
some articles missing Well, gentlemen, up 10
that point there is nothing wrong charged
against him. He at once suspects this woman
Of having taken the articles. 1t is the violation
of no law that he should suspect her. 1t is the
violation OF no good morals that he should sus-
pect her. 1t is the violation of no good manners
that he should suspect her at all. And vet this
article charges that he did suspect her, and that
he followed after and called her attention to the
fact. That charges him with no crime; no sem
blaDce of crime; no pretence of crime. Why
gentlemen. not in all the wide, wide world, and
with all the power Of Imagination and OF eN-
preston, can anybody thus far find ANYTHING in
this TO charge this man with any derelction of
duty or of manners. OF course, the lady felt
injured. 1t is not that he approached her In a
rude way. 1t is not said that he was insulting
in his manner to her. II was not in that that II
consisted. Not at all. He asked her for nothing
He charged her with nothing save that which
grew out of what he understood the transaction
to be-a thing that he had perfect right to do.
What further? That he proceeded to magis-
uate's and made charge or complaint against
her; that the officer was called upon to make An
arrest, who refused to do it. II was not done
And there is all there is of it.
NOW, gentlemen, in order that this should be
ibelious-aDd 1 say it both for the Cont and
the jury-if there had been an intimation in this
article q al he fall