New-York tribune., 1875-02-05
that 1t had been disposed Of and tho meeting thon ad
journed.
VIII. KEMBLEs LIBEL SUIT
THE SUIT AGAINST CHARLES A. DANA CoNCLUDED-A


THE JURY DISAGREE.
The libel suit Of William ii. Kemble against
Charles A. DANA for the publication in The New York
Sun OF alleged ibelous charges affecting Kembes char
acer was concluded yesterday before Judge Curtis OF
Superior Court The greater portion OF the day was
spent in summing up the part OF william o. Bartlett,
who appears, with willard Bartlett. for the de-
fense and by Wheeler H. Peckham. who ap'
pears, with r. c. f. Ecclesine, for the paintih
The first witness called during the morning was
William stOkley Mayor of Philadelphia who tcsthed
that he had known Mr. Kembe twenty years. HIS oDar-
scer both In public and private lifo very good
Charles W. Brooke. wellkn0wn lawyer or THIS clty'
formerly of Philadelphia. testified that Mr. KemOles
character was above reproach. John H. G. Whiting. an
insurance publisher OF Philadelphia testified that his
character and reputation good every respect as
q business man, State Treasurer, and as banker.
J. L. Tobias formerly OF Philadelphia and now lawyer
OF this city, testified Mr. Kembes reputation was
good Joseph i. Ecclesne, r OF Philadelphia stated
that had made unsuccessful search Tor the uOto
GUS addition division and silence" letter through the
Offices of the Philadelphia newspapers He found Mr.
Davis who told him 1t had been IN the Office OF The In
quirer in the hands OF Mr. Bogart, who had told him
Davis that did correspond with the ono In The
Sun, because the word "addition" had been added.
Thomas " Eccesne OF the attorneys, was called 10
prove that offer OF settlement the basis OF retrac
tion made to Mr.. Dana through his counsel Ihe
defense objected and tho Court ruled 1t out Mr. Bartlett
then withdrew his objection, but Mr.. Peckham In his
turn objected to the withdrawal, so the matter was
dropped.
The summing up OF Mr. Bartlett occupied an hour
and half and was an eloquent plea for the freedom OF
the press Mr. Peckham overran his time, and by MS
frequent collisions with the Messrs. Bartlett added
piquancy address, and often made the audience
laugh heartily. Ho had begun his argument with a
quiet fling at Mr.. Bart!e:ts intimacy with. Dir. Dana
the defendant and his consequent interest In tnls
case, remarkug that no "beieved the counsel
was O large stockhoder in The Sun" Mr.. Bart
lett, sr was temporarily absent, but Willard
Bartlett ironically asked II that in the evidence
Mr.. Peckham then snilingy put the question to him.
but Mr. Bartlett decLod to give any unnecessary In
formation Mr. Peckhan assumed, then. that 1t was so
and said that he had erstood that Mr. Bartlett sr
was in receipt Of hands, ne dividends and that he r
Peckham) wouldn't obje to taking some OF the stock
himself "We'n sell yo,. some" interrupted Mr.. Bart
lett. "Ah" said Mr. Po khan, then you have some,"
and the courtroom led with laughter Mr.. Peckham
adverted rather sarcast'1ay to The suns advocacy or
Gov Tden's election, connecting it indirectly with
fact OF of Mr. Il rtetts sons beug Colonel on
mate little later on hat the date OF the letter or
Kembe "My Dear T,ian" had been altered from the
lst to the 2Oth The Sun office, Mr. Bartlett, sr who
had now arrived, indignantly and loudly exclaimed,
at infamous, lyirL charge don't care whether
darkness. IL is a lie Vas, that is the word"
Still further Mr.. ieckham said something about
NJ In.
The sun claimed to be NOeOus, at which Mr Bartlett
again cried out: ado you make tnLt charge here
ask the Court to say tElt there Is not hing TO justify
such an arOcious sanda~ II is an outrage on cly "a
itself; it is vilanY and falsehood II you should
say that under oath would no sent 10 the State
Prison" MIR. Peckham rejODng that tho atrocity was
in publishing wrltiAg the letter, went on with his
argument.
TIE charge OF Judge Curtis considered very favor
able 10 the defense liz he said that there were two
kinds OF libel-naciOus LIBEL that Il, libel prompted by
spirit of spite and vuGctyeness and legal or implied
malice. The former hal not been shown in this case
and this fact would operate OF course, to mitigate dam
age The Jury did retire until after p. m and
after au absence Of about b0ur returned with the
quest TO hear the sten0grapher's notes read
IN reference certain portion OF the evidence.
The foreman said II absolutely Impossible
for them to agree. Judge Curtis told them they had
been out such a short time they ought to try further
He had 10 said II than up jumped four or rYe or
the iurymen, evidently alarmed at the prospect or
nig hit in the Courthouse Juror No said tnat they
were none OF them far from each other In their
opinions; the point Of difference was small aud dell
cate one but il essential and on that their opinions
were positively irrecOncilabe. But Judge Gurus was
inexOrabe, and tue jury were compelled 10 retire AGAIN
out they could Lot and about poc0ek were dis
charged,