, 1874-12-16
Mr.. STOREY.
Arguing tho Motion to Quush tic
First Libel Suit.
III. Assay States and Explains His
Points--.Mr. Reed's Reply.
Tho Court Takes 1t Under Adylsemcnt.

1lo t0urL lakes IL Untlcf AuflsemcHts
Tho arsitnehts on the motion to quhsh tho in"
dlotmcnt returned agatnat Wilbur i. Storey, for
sibe1lng N. K. Fairbank, wero made III tho
Criminal Court. before Judge Tree, yeasotdny
morning.
MN. AsAY'S F1Ner OBJECTION
was, TINT 1t wna not alleged in tho Indictment
whoro tho paper III Which tho alleged 'ioel was
published wns circulated simply arofring that IN
tho County Of Cook, Stats OF iliinos, tho Do
feudnnt mnlicously, wichedly, eto., printed,
published, did cauhod to bo published, ID cor
tain newspaper Of general circulation. Known aB
tho Chicago Times, tlo did not think It would
bo seriously questioned thas the place Of pub
lication MAS ID essential element OF tho
ycnuo liz tho chso, II II woro proved thak tito
libelous mattor was pnbflshod III tho Times nnd
not proved that Tho Times was published In
Chicago, Mr. Storey could not DO convicted. No
intendmenis could ho drawn In favor Of tho
prosecution; thoy mist bo In favor Of tho de-
fouso The actual place Of publication was es-
scntial; tho allegation was aot that tho 1fbnl
was published in paper published In said
(Cook) county. but that 1t wab published III tho
Chicago Times. 1t being not stated whoro tho
paper was put into circulation.
4AH oUAAk~4a ~ F4tAk1ub AQtA pAUllHlllH UF
publishing dud circulating. that makos the libol
Atr. Kood-Pnblishing. II 1t was printed mud
not orcu1atoa, ho would mt 10 !,ablo.
Mr. Asay-It IL nccessary 10 havo limo and
place In each material aycrmont. 1le then road
nuthorlties to chow that libel cousisted in tho
nctuui publication. mud thnt tho place whcro tho
publication was ulado was tho only place where
tho libel could bo alleged.
f'he Cou1t-Tho allegation is TINT ho did
"tlen mud thoro" print aud publish certain
things.
Mr. Asay-1t does not nlioso where tho paper
vas circulated. which is material allegations:
Tho Court--Suppose tho paper WIS prlutcd
and published loro, but not circulated in this
county. would it bo liboi7
Mr.. Asay-So. sir ; 1t would not. Tho law Is
distinct upon tint point. 1t ia only whoro tho
rancr ia circulated that the libel takes place.
Tho Conrt-What is tho technical meaniuG Of
tho word publish?
Mr.. Asay-ro give to tho public; actually cir
cu1ata; sid nu construction can alter it.
THE NEXT POINT
was that tho indictment in each count alleged
more than one oifcnsc. BY this comnling1lng
tho prosecutor would havo IN unfair advantage
over tho defendant. and Tho Court should 1nash
the indictment by o1orcising tho discretionary
power vested in him IN savor Of tbs accused.
The indictment included oil the olfcnscs known
to the lan Of libel.
The Court-Aro the terms honesty, integrity,
yiltue. reputation, otc., not convertible?
Aly. Asay-1 think not.
THO Court-Thcy certainly arc. aa m attack
on man'h llouoaty OF Integrity is an attack on
bis reputation.
Mr.. Aeay-Intcgrity is ono thing honesty is
nnuthcr, and reputation another. A man might
be over 10 honest, md yet have the reputation
vi1luoua aud yet not bo charged With problsy.
ANoTuEn OBJECTION
Waa that, not only woro novera! o1Tonncs charged
IN each count, hut several iutonts. No rule lad
evcr gono 60 far as to charge sov-
snpr ssa tsnts soa to not s'' ees rs on' @ sS ~
ono ho would pursue. Dcsidos, tho indictment
wis not based on tho ntatute. 1t not forth that
something waa done ITO tho groat injury.
&C., ssanua aud disgrace OF lt tho sa,a Fairbank"
that statntoly enactment did not aupersods
the common 1aw7 The statute said: "T1oreby
exposing him to public hatred, contempt, ril-
cuo. or financial injury" Would tho Court
Tbs statute had limited and modified tho Inv Of
libel as it stood at common law, an1 had deter
mined for tho courts that there should be no
Donyictlon unless tho libo!ous matter complained
Of exposed tho party to "pub1io hntroh, con-
tempt, ridicule, or financial injury" Tho par
scular injury must DO declared. The torms were
not convertible.
Tho coust-supposo those woraa had been
left out?
Mr. Aaay-They would not hare good case.
There must 10 a positive agorment, not iu{er-
cnces.
His client was ohnrged With publishing libel
meratcd wore distinct. different intenss, not ono
intent. bciag alleged Authorities were thou
read 10 establish that tho language Of tho
statutes mist bo complied with in NIL caHcB; autI
tint whatever was injected as IN element Of tho
olfcnHo must DO alleged In tho Indictment. It
Was necessary, to constitute tho ofleusa, to show
that the mattor was published With tho yiow of
exposing the party to "publio hatred, contempt,
- h. t+13.. -. H.,
nns. bo proven. Unloes the indictment con-
tlined tho statutory ingredients it would not bo
good, since man could not prove wlat he did
not allcge.
Mr.: Roed-Thoso wo:da arc in the Indictment,
ut the commencement.
Mr. Asay-Dnt they must conclude it.
Tho Court-poes the indictment allogo any,
whero that tho libel charged was printed and
published with the intent to expose tho prosocut-
illg witness to contempt rillculo, or financial iu-
Mr. Asay--YcH, but It docs not aver that that
VAS the tendency Of it. Il mau might intend to
do thing but, il what he did had not a tendency
to do it, Ills net is .o oircnso Tho law deals NTH
Ects, not With motives.
III. nEED,
in reply, aad he did not think it necessary to say
wurd as tho objections Wero tho most trivial
TINT could b. made. 1t was we'll known to every
lawyer that it waB not necessary to prove the in-
duccmsnt either In al indictment or declaration.
Tho old indictments road "aotnntcd by tlIo
DEVIL" "without tho fear Of God;" would It be
ooutended that that would have to be proved OH
the trlal? Tho proposition Was absurd. Tho
indictment started out With tho isiduconlont, but
IT II hau hoeu omitted tho indictment would be
good. Tho words woro put in because thoy
sTere in tho bonla. It was not true TINT M in
tent must bo alleged in such q charge. Who're
crime consists Of TN lMtont-as murder,
robbery. ctc.--it must be alleged but
the libel statute did not hare tho word '.intent :"
Init. i was for tho Court to eay whether tho
publication was such as to expose tho party CON-
planning to public hatred. eto. Tho words
.'Gnanclel Injury" Aa1 nothing to do with tho
indscsment It was not based upon that at nil.
i he was ~ exposed to either of tho thlpgs mon-
toned the otlonao waA complete.
Mr. Assay, bY way Of replication, road tho doil-
milton Of cri'ne-R joint uuiop Of act aud iu-
toution: saying, And got it was nssertod that
1t was not noeoAaary to ailego au intent"
Mr. need-It ia mt.
Mr. AAay-unlcas tho ingredients that 50 to
mako up the ofenBo aro embodied in the lndict-
mont it is not good QUO.
~. hccd-Ihoy are distinctly and explicitly
fnrft