Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1872-02-20
THE STARS IHDua, SUIT.
Mr.. Prince, the 0tamper, wants
40 0OO.

| STAR of October 10Th, 1870:
| AN INsULIED MFE-A HUSBANDS VENGEANCE
| THE WRONG Man PUNISHED.
few day since the wife Of yell known grocer
stsmpins done Tor embroidery at q stamping esta5-
lishnent and fsncy store on street, well known
hsBded TO Der she ieit the store, and Proceeded
bsmswsrd The PROPRIETOR, however, soon after
knowing the social standing Of his late Customer
A CASE OF KLEPToMASIA,
and that she vas The oulp,it be hastily follow
her, and oyertakrs her asked her name. She gave
u tn him, being much sur prIsed At his manner He
the told her his for making he inquiry and
The lady was naturally indignant, but went on her
Of the store in the meantims proceeded a ma gis.
trste's flee. OBJ aimed wsrrat for the s-rest 81
on her. The cfhcer, when he was informed Of the
offence and for whose arrss, the warrant issued
r.tustd to serve IT, saying there must be some mis-
tske, and II the pro- ecu2r was willing q get mt
ssEspe by aIIssti,g lady Of her standing. he (the
ed her bus bend of the circumstance and Re At orc.
threatened vengeance on the man who had gross
sufscss our purpose to say cemmences with ?. He
registered 1t On the ,sbiets Of his memory with
VOW OF vENGEsNcE,
prompt and terrible; but, unf rtunately, he ass.
same royal title as the fancy store man The angry
for be had hardly reached bis place Of business
when he saw the pOrtly form of p the pswnbroker
this was the individual h. sought the angry er%eSr
sccosted him and invited him IN. y i'll You please
never dr. eamiBg thar this was a hostile message,
equivalent to the deceptive invitation of
THE SPIDER TO TIE FLY,
waktd in. will You please step into the cellar a
Moment was the next invitation. p. was some
he reached b tom than he regretted his weak
ness Instead Of being invited to taste some rare
old wine. or become the purchaser of some laid by
article of the grocery trade, as be anticipated, he
". ndeTingly saw his host place himself n boxing
ishm,n at this unex pect sight before his eye
struck by bis hosts knIckles. Other blows on
was pawhbroker so belabOred. They had a lively
time an that E, liar Tor shout 1--WE minutes you bet,
Tut exhaustion finally ensued, aud the painting
IaTnbroker At last found ssopportunity to Inquire
Mutual
won you take 'onsthingr Here's to you, old
Mr.. Darlington asked for a long panel, and
the following jurors were selected and sworn -
Ferdinand Butler, Columbus Thomas, James
L. Boisseau, Robert Amery, James Lavender.
james Nourse, John Il. Lee, Fred. Volk, Fl.
PolkinhOrn. q. r. Thompson, Chas. Dyson and
James W. Ferguson.
MIR. Darlington, for the plaintiff, opened the
case stating that it was special action for libel
brought by Mr.. VIM. Prince, a resident of this
city for nineteen years, a gentleman Of sub
stance and character, above reproach, against a
corporation equally well known as the Evening
broHght by Mr.. Charles s. Wallach. They had
laid the damages at s1O, 900, and the measure of
damages was a question for the jury. He
was obliged to bring this suit to vindicate his
character, and it was only after he had taken
this course 10 vindicate himself that his business
revived. He further stated for the benefit of
the jury that his business was stamping and
brought him into contact with the ladies Of the
city generally and strangers.
Mr.. Darlington next read the caption of the
alleged libel saying that this proud Overgrown
corporation had for money published this
libel: been hired perhaps by a rival of the plain
tiff. He was heralded by The EVENING STAR
as having insulted the wife of one of our citi-
zens, and the ladies demanded that he should
vindicate his character. They were not satisfied
with publishing in paper having the largest
circulation in the District the libel, but placed
lished in other cities.
Proceeding with the reading of the article.
which caused much amusement, he added that
this was the libel, and they expected to show the
bearing it bad on the business OF the plaintiff
Mr.. Riddle said that this was not one of those
awful cases that had been pictured. No neigh
borhoods had been des royed lLaughter.l When
his friend was speaking he questioned whether
he had ever known the parties. He proposed to
show what was beneath this case. 1t was true
that there was party named Prince who did
business on r street, where lady went and was
accused of passing a counterfeit ten dollar bill;
she was followed, and p. made complaint before
Justice Plant, charging her with passing such
a bill. The officer refused to serve the writ
On examination of the papers he was at loss
to know whether il was the Prince who dealt in
prints, or the member OF the Royal family who
was in the broker business who had brought the
action. IL seemed to him that the broker WAS
the injured one. This transaction got out and
the article was published. A few DAYS there
after the f street Prince came to the Office
making complaint, but he did not know exactly
what he was complaining of. As a result of the
interview, another article was Published treat
ing the affair in terms of badinage.
He (Mr. Riddle) did not see that this case was
OF any great benefit to any one; it may be
amusing. He would submit that the declaration
was vague and general, and that they could not
prove any special damage under it.
Mr.. Darlington was about to offer the act of
Congress incorporating the Evening Star News
paper Company.
Mr.. Riddle objected to any testimony as to
the incorporation OF the Evening Star News
paper Company, as there was no allegation in
the declaration that it was an incor porated
company.
The Court ruled that it was necessary that the
declaration should contain the allegation, and
gave leave to amend the declaration.
The plaintiff, Wm. Prince, was called, and
testified that he was subscriber to THE STAR
in 1870, and received his paper on the evening
the libel was published, and noticed the article.
He identified the paper.
Mr.. Darlington Offered the alleged libel in
Mr.. Riddle objected, because there was no
proof that this company had anything to do
The court admitted the paper in evidence for
the present.
Mr.. Darlington read the act of incorporation.
Witness resumed; knew Messrs. Noyes, Kauff-
mann and Shepherd by sight, and was told at
His place OF business was 1000 street; had Ken.
there years; been in this city % years.
Mr.. Care there any other establishments of
the same kind in the CITY.
Mr.. Riddle objected because it was irrelevant
Mr.. Darlington said that any fact going TO
show motive could be admitted. 1t may be that
some rival in business had something to do with
this libel He thought that he had the right to
SHOW the character and relative standing of those
in the business.
The court sustained the objection.
Witness was asked to detail the character of
the business, and objection being made il was
sustained.
Witness was asked If his business diminished
after the publication.
Mr.. Riddle objected and claimed that il must
be alleged that his customers left him, aod
name them-reading an authority on the sub
ject.
After some discussion the court sustained the
objection.
Witness resumed:-Next morning he called on
MI Noyes, who stated that he would make en-
qury as to the origin of the article; that he
would make playful explanation OF IL in the
afternoon edition, and would give him local
notice; witness told NJ. Moves that he did not
want local notice; that he could paw for them:
on returning foundseverai ladies who were wait
ing for their work, done or undone-
Mr.. Riddle objected. and Judge Macarthur
said that he would hold they were entitled to
general damages and this species Of testimony
as not competent.
Mr.. Darlington said he would proceed to an
other branch of the case.