New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-10-31
A MILK LIBEL SUIT.
DAMAGES CUT DOWN FROM $4,000 TO $50

DAMAGES CUT DOWN FROM $4,000 TO 500.
The case of Aaron Ganong against The
TRIBUNE Association, in which suit brought for
$4,000 damages plaintiff by the publication of state
ment that employees adulteraed the milk furnished
to his employers concluded yesterday verdict for
tbe plan for the sum OF Fifty Dollars rendered
IL appeared Quenty that OF the jury IN
doubt as to a part Of the evidence favorable to the
defendant and sent an inquiry TO tue Court as to tile
actual testimony on the point. Some delay ensued In
absence Of the senographer and the
Jury came into Court without waiting TO receive reply
TO their inquiry. 1t that during the delay in
order TO settle the matter compromise was made be-
tween those who favored giving the plaintiff 500 dam
ages and those who wished to find absolutely for the
and verdict for plaintiff for $50 rendered
In charging the Jury Judge Donohue delivered the follow
ing fair udicous charge upon the duties and respon
sibilities Of newspapers:
GENTLEMEN: IL is the duty OF the law and Of the jury
10 protect rights OF all citizens in character person.
and estate but in protecting this and protecting the
property OF man. you are 10 recoect well at the
same time protect the property OF ALL Mt Ganong Is
here asking Tor damages, he Is entitled to receive
them but the jury must at the same time that they
protect the rights of the defendan If the defendant
has acting fairly aud justly THE TRIBUNE stands
here as any other defendant would. No matter what
our political feelings attachments may be- that has
no hing to do with this case HE TRIBUNE has either
got 10 account for its actions answer for Its Oenses
All admit-tho plaintiffs peadngs admit-tnat the
subject of aduleratOn OF milk was very griev0us
evil In this community That subject was one that had
attracted the attention Of the community as being
of great Importance. The counsel has very truly
observed that tho press Is very great agent
There IA no doubt that has immense power and when
that power Is malicousy or wanonly directed IKE the
power Of the policeman you appoint or the Judge on
The bel ch the punishment should be proportIonate to
inc oense increasing with tue power which they nave
directed. when il is done with good motives ana in
jushable manner in the same way that you protect
Inc Policeman the exercise Of his Office and the judge
in the exercise of his, and the jury in tue
exercise OF their discretion. 80 the press Is
10 be protected This subject attracted the attention OF
the community. II q far subject Tor the news
papers TO comment IL was fair subject Tor them 70
hsfoTe Won ali the testimony on that point. You have
Mr. Shanks, who is uncontradcted, aud you have tho
reporter VINO sent tn examine on TINS particular
noint ana he Is uncoDtradicted that his Instructions
were be icareul aud very correct w 70 tnat
rI%ht 70 exercise to correct evils aud up 10 this
pSlnt IL seems have been fairly aud honestly eXer
and perhaps 1t was q duty they owed 10 the pubic, to
give IT, II directed in far and legitimate manner.
Here gentlemen begins the difference between these
TWO parties Up this time all agree as TO the fairness
and honesty please. with which this question had
been investigated.
Hero Judge Donohuc commented at some length on
the testimony Of the various Witnesses giving the jury
the necessary instructions their consideration OF It,
He then concluded:
II you find you have fair reasonable ground to believe
the Of the Witnesses II you believe
the adulteratI0n took place. then the defendant Ia
titled 10 a verdict but II you believe IL did not then
there only question: and charge you as matter
NJ law as there have been actual damages shown by
tie plaintiff further than Is to be inferred by the law
no malice On the contrary the facts here abundanty
show u want OF malice 30 Tar as these defendants
are concerned, T1ere maoe an entire absence
Of the defendant pabshne the article In this
mistaken about the milk having been adulterated, the
plaintiff would not be entitled to vindctve damages
In this world all OF have 10 put up with little in
oonvenences. Sometimes mistakes will happen, aud
we have TO suffer the consequences order that the
But it Ia not for every Isheer technical or aoei
dental violation that yndiotlye asnassa are to be gyen.