New-York tribune., 1874-11-30
TIE Ross LIBEL CASE.

We had occasion 10 comment some Wechs
ago on the case of the Ross child in Philadel-
phia, as a marked example of the effects OF
INSCRIPTIONS sensational journalism. After
the first taste of the tragedy began to pail on
the public palate, the purveyOrs of excitement
seized upon the character of the Ross family,
and so befouled and yilified them that the
health of the mother of the child failed, and
beneath the weight Of grief and slander Mr..
ROss's reason has given way, it is feared, never
to be restored
But there is another side to the story; for
in fact every point connected with this re-
markable case evolves curious domestic
interest. In order to clear himself Of the
false accusations heaped upon him, criminal
suit for libel was brought by Mr.. Ross against
the proprietOrs OF The Heading Eagle on ac-
count of an article published in that journal ;
the article having been concOcted by Il son of
the editor from some womans gossip reported
to him by his wife or mother.
The defendants were found guilty, and are
now awaiting sentence So far as the strict
rendering of the law OF libel is concerned, we
have nothing to say in the matter. Somebody
certainly ought to be responsible for the
defamatory lie which creeps into n paper to
blast the character of an honest man and
blight the happiness of his home. But there
is Justice broader than law, which it seems
to us might well be brought to bear in this
case. Neither of the propretOrs, it appears,
knew of the libelous article until they read it
in the mornings issue; their error was that
of judgment in the choice of reporter not
that of malice or ill-will to the assailed man.
Mr. Ross's end in bringing the suit was fully
answered when it was gained. His innocence
was fully proved. 1t certainly cannot add to
that proof, or atone to him for the insult
offered to know that these guiltess men are
incarcerated in a prison cell. Nor can it
console him for his lost child to know that
their children are subjected to want and disgrace.
They are poor men the owners of q small
country paper are not likely to be rich in the
worlds goods. The same libel and others
more malignant were widely published in
large journals in New-Yorll and the West,
against which no complaint has been entered.
To pounce upon the proprietors of this poor
little sheet and shut them up for years in
convict's cell may be legal action, but it is not
the justice which will commend itself or those
who incite it to the nnreasoning generous
public. We understand the defendants have
applied for a new trial. 1t ought to avail
nothing to prove before an intelligent jury in
this trial that these men were ignorant of the
crime imputed to them, that if convicted their
families must bo left in absolute want; it
should have no bearing on the case to tell of
the child of one dead since the trial began
and of the mother watching now over another
dying child. These matters have no bearing
ON legal verdict. But they do and should
have bearing on the judicial sentence and the
pardoning power, and if this wider justice
should prevail to render their sentence nom-
nal or to release them altogether it surely will
DO with the approval of good men.