Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-06-26
IMPORTANT LIBEL SUIT.
Notion for a New Trial in the Case OF
Jacob Hawkins against the New
Orleans Pieayune ''-Fun
Text Of the Paper.

NEW ORLEANS, June 25.-The follow
ing motion was filed this morninz in tbs
case Of Jacob Hawkins against tbe New
Orleans Pfedystae, on motion N The
counsel for the New Orleans printing
and Publishing company, the defendant
herein: 1t Is ordered that the plaintiff
show cause on Monday, June Both, whv
a new trial should not be granted here
in upon the following grounds, t. wit:
First-That the verdict Of the
jury and Judgment thereon are clearly
contrary to the Law and evidence.
Seeond-That the court erred in ex-
Guiding the evidence offered by
the defendant for the purpose OF
establishing the truth of the charges
contained in the article com
planned Of as libeling, said evidence
being clearly admissible to sustain the
Justification contained in the defend
ants answer, and even under the gen
sral issue TO show an absence Of malice
in making the publication.
| Ihird-That the court erred in refls-
ing permission to defendant to place
/ plaintiff on the stand Is a witness for
defendant. said plaintiff having been
regularly summoned by defendant, and
being then in court under that summons.
| Fourth-That the court erred in ruling
out the testimony and evidence ofrared
by the defendant TO show the Al -eG7e of
malice from the surrounding eIfcg-D
stances and situation of the par -s
Fifth-The court erred In ru rs out
the report Of the commissioner. Inasle to
the United States senate in regard to
the late general election in Louisiana
which was offered by the defendant to
establish his absence. Of malice, the
privileged character Of the article COM
planned of, and in mitigation Of damages
Sixth-That the court erred in reftls-
Ag the charges asked by the defend
ants, LAST of which charges was that q
matter of public history, affecting the
whole people, and public matters affect
ing the governmentO of the country could
De judicially taken notice OF, by a Jury,
without proof.
Seventh-That the jury which tried
the case was bFibed, and behaved i'm
properly, 30 that impartial justice was
not done in this cause, as is fully set
forth in the affidavit hereunto annexed
and made part Of this motion.
The affidavit is made by B. r.
TOrmanr and contains the follow
ing allegations That the jury
was bribed; that two of the ju-
rors, Paul DaqHiE and Frank Haworth.
openly confessed that they were
Improperly influenced and bribed,
and that their verdict was not
impartial; that while the case was
upon trial before these persons Paul
Daquin confessed to Charles Claiborne
that he had been offered one thousand
dollars that Daquin was approached
by George Walker, a deputy-sheriff and
crier of the court in which this suit was
tried, who slipped into his hand a note,
which was in substance as follows:
''Mr. Daquin, if you 20 with the ma
jOTity, there is five hundred dollar note
at the store for you. Your friend on st.
Charles street."
That the said Walker at the same
time whispered not TO open the note un-
I'll he, the said Daquin, was in the Jury
room; that he, the juror Daquin, was in
favor Of verdict for the defendants,
lneiading the company, and that
on the receipt of the said
note he changed his position; that
the affiant has been informed that said
George Walker, having confessed TO the
truth Of the above charge, has been dis
missed from his position as crier of the
court; that juror Hawthorne was also
0rloed, he having received twenty-five
dollars from person who was intro
dueed to him on Galvez bridge by ThOs.
}. KavaDaugh, with an addition al one
hundred and twenty-five dollars in case
the verdict should be rendered for twen-
ty-nye thousand dollars. By agreement
The motion was set for hearing ON Mon
day next.