The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-03-11
THE WINSTON.ENGLISH LIBEL
SUIT.
LIBEL

How the Case Stands in the Courts-Im.
portant Opinion-The Freedom OF the
Press as Viewed from . Judicial Stand
point.
1t Is unnecessary to 60 over in detail the facts
connected with the libel suit brought by Frederick
S. winston. President OF the Mutual Life Insurance
Company, against stephen English, Of the InSur-
aace Times. Directly after the suit was instituted,
in January last the full facts were given in the
HERALD 1t will be remembered that Mr.. winston
demands 800 900 damages and that upon an order
OF arrest granted by Judge Barbour, Of the Superior
Court. against Mr.. English, the latter, in default OF
$4,000 ball. committed to Ludlow Street
Jail. The next legal step, after procuring the
order OF arrest The obtaining by Mr. English OF
an order ior the examination OF Mr.. winston. lie
claimed that he could not put In his defence until
after such examination and that he had q right to
such examination IN order to enable him TO obtain
facts necessary TO prove his defence. Among the
facts alleged as essential TO ascertain from Mr..
Winston was whether he had acted corruptly in
connection with the examination into the Affairs OF
the company by special legislative committee APP
pointed for this purpose and the superintendent Of
life insurance companies; whether he had not used
the money OF the company 10 pay his private DEBTS
and whether he had not Improperly revived policy
of the company in favsr OF his son after the same
had lapsed. About week ago, before Judge
Freedman, holding Special Term Of the superior
Court a motion was made on behalf OF Mr.. Win
ston to vacate The order OF examination, TO witch
reference aas just been made, Judge Freedman
yesterday gave his decision upon this motion. Ne
embodies his secession IN . very lengthy written
opinion The Drst part OF IT, and, In fact. the bulk,
Is devoted 10 an exhaustive RENEWAL OF tile power
vested in the Courts to grant examinations OF this
character The latter part when alone Is OF puohc
interest, we give below, anu Is as iouows:-
NATURE or THE ACTION
Now the case unier consideration Is an action Tor
made upon sc.enisnt's af,davt which shows the ser.
nature Of The Se 80 copy OF the is he'd
nor has any been submitted on this motion In ae both
shutting the libel The AFFIDAVIT states that the defend
ANT advised tina. the examination OF the plain:ir
deendan; 10 frame his the complaint and 70
pead and ro'c the facts and circumstances sought to
ages The defendant swears that lie expects prove
b the examination OF the plaintiff the substantial truth OF
made published by hn concerning the plaintiff ana
thcreupon the affidavit concludes with the enumeration
coyery is sought Gu, the defendant does not show by
whom he has been adyi;ed stated. lie does not say
yet does disclose what knowledge or nformson
premises No facts stated from which the mater
or necessity Of he proposed eSamina,on De gath
peculiar knowledge OF the and sought
TO be discovered On the contrary most Of them II true
and relevant appear TO be ptble proof nv
auto number OF other Witnesses And beyond ali thai
IL can be plainly that The DEFENDANT II really dc.
'"01' " ~" TRUTH oY rux IIsxILous BATTER
published defence, already posse sses all the tnowl
plea OF nstincation or or mitigating cireunsascos
especially The code permits him to do y on mere IN
therefore they viii not assist In giving increased pub
iicity TO scpndaous matter, except when absolutely
. ~ .h se 81 % IL
sasniis. Il The doctrine exists a all thsss party may