Daily national Republican. (Washington City [D.C.]) 1870-1872, 1872-05-11
THE COURTS.
CIVIL.


SUPREME UouRr o. rHr DtarRtcr ar Cot.us.
ntA-Gsnsral TeTm.-ljhief Justice Oartter and
Justiees DIN, Humphreys and Macarthur sat
TnI foLIAno CONTRACT oAsx susrItnxp.
Mrs, A, m, Pollard vs.. lyon nm Va AZ ~.
tion below for danlsges Tor an alleged br,ssh Of
The iury below ave ths piaintiT nnoJsrat.
damaUes The Ohief Justiae Announced thst
the Judgment below was afirmsd,
MAS PcLLARD's $4,000 vIaDIoT ron sLAsDra
Pollard vs.. Lyon. This was an action Of alan.
aa%PSrsyS dSvsf.d tho SpniSI IL ~
We think that 10 INC ruIinEs OF the circuit
justice there was no error. me motion IN Ar.
rest Of Judgment ID heard In general Term now
detepdant and ehsrred IN M a.. sr.,I ~ mo
al saw her fthe plalntifii in bcJ Win S,snssin
Denly" ithas been settled that AT coIpmon
cuSod 10 iniamoua nunishmont a. ~ a. Is,i.,
ment for 4 crime ihyolving moral tnSni,a,,s ~
In themselves actionnbie Without aIonnsnt or
proof Of special damages. "
ground that as between men ! ehsfse mad. NV NV
one against another could result 10 no serioSs
injury, as general ruis, unless the charge, II
were spoken 70 the inconvenience snd danyn1s
OF an Indictment In which the public wouid 10
aTrayed agaInIt him. IL may u true thSi' a. N
from words which IN true would no. AMI conN
not be followed by an indictmsnt and ~ n uOuu
ment. Be the reason what II NAV. We mi tha
rule and cannot depart from SC. Rude a. he
thought 70 haT. bssn n pSobsbiy ald mn nay O o.
70 them that the same rule would coma toh" an
q %SSS 5sssa sg 80 s to protect The
Ia damages for the looseness of hIs tanlrs ~
Il may not have entered the mind That tbe time
n" reputatien n vowau.s Sba NV nv, ,ssas.
bound down, manacied- by the sinhhosn ~ ~
authority, and the remedv "a Nv me Iastsiapi..
authority. = : 'si''"'''
UThe words in this case import notbi,. .I..
legally or recording 10 me Common otdina,I
acospfation Of those words, than a modal Way
Of charging illicit intercourse betwssn a MAJ S
tho charEe. ths kssner ths in,1ry WV ~
deisndanf eaid. II iooted oysr ~. , en sns
light, and Jaw Mr.. Pollard IN had Win Hsn,sdn
charS: Va t,Ta ~ . miedshng ne
n untrus' he shoaid ~ MAJ ~ an.J vs.nsoi
wrong Committed, ii NAV b reeretied ,hai ~
moS iaS ~ snva1r,n M. me I9ie o. the com;
By the rulo that ne eharra mnst h. n ynsda
which. fftrue. would snbierf ths se.gsib rVius
indictasnL There IL moral turpI.uSe in thS
dIolea even N the Truth ofthe ehSSss Va sstsh
iishod, nor subiected 10 ininriona nunish Sesn1
Tho act Of Maryland Of iTip removed ne insie,
the Act ~ iy lsnaaiad IN n, ah h
punishmsnt q forhincation. We tSinE ,Snt t we
msnsats "a aH,hnsI,yt S ~ es, so-Dy ne
MeI1onSid Va Iiil,v Indau Wy ~ ~. nsn nv
yersed' ''' 'Nusu''A' O''ou re'.
weIsh Va Thomas. This case Kr,w ont Of IN.
used BY real sstats sfSat N az
ma business MI Iovsiov ins,s,sR nv, . AZ "
omption Il extended Ia he law itseiI u ofhsrs
than hoas.hoidsSs rhs ,,0,s.. hsgn ~ otneIs
under advisemsnt A"o 'Our' heiu 'he case
JoSeph IJunninRha,n vi. Aha, pr.,, NH.
action wa brougbt pnon thsas rso,,i..,,s ,a,is
aIie1ed M hSve hasn naas ~ an 1O..s
ThsfS va Mai with ne dsn,. Y ny ~ usidnunt,
An adaVit asttins foSth Tia cass ~ ls,I |
ne amount eisimed Nv thn nisina,s r Sns
was MED and served by the dafsndsn, ai1.sRr v@
siIssed mt Ala ~ se.ds,,, 9 ~. pfgise ~
defence, as required by the rules Of az c COZ