The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1875-12-19

--ss--v-
it ID not possible foff witnesses 10 epm
pute, In money, the precise injury done
to the feelings, the pride and staudins
Of those who bear good reputation
and whose characters are respfrted Il
Is, therefore, your duty 70 c0hsidtf the
general rspufa ton md character Of the
plaintiffs, and the nature and extent d
their business ~ mcrchnnts dhd trades
1 men. should yon md that the lon
GUS touches them in respect 10 thcil
characters or calling. Language ol
one in his trade or profession Is action
able pr sc when 1t imputcs to him fraud
want 81 integrity Or misconduct In the
/ line Of his business on profession, whore
by he gains his bread" Townsend on
Islander and libel, SccH. 1y2 and 25G j
| ANY charge OF dishonesty against an
individual, In connection With his bust.
ness, whereby his character In such
business may be injuriously affected. Is
actionablc." You are the judges Of the
law and Of the facts. You should take
application addresses itself to your de-
liberate judgments and approving con-
conscienccs. You arc the sole judges Of
the facts, and are to decide whether
they sustain the plaintiffs material al
legations or not Also, whether Paul
FOurchy has been shown, with reason.
able and legal certainty, to have SIAN
dered the plaintiffs IS alleged. II Is
equally incumbent on you to ascertain
and determine whether the alleged H.
bells were actually perpetrated by
either tho said FOurchy, or by tho com
Rany, or by both Of them Ia concert.
I'm al mi
this has been done, aud tho plaintiff Is
entitled TO verdict against either or
both. should you find the proof smfii.
Client. In other words. you may find for
plaintiffs against either party, should
tho proof establish his or It's completely
In the libclous matters as charged. You
may lind against plaintiffs, as to
either party, should you find the evil
dence insufficient to fix his or It's com
plicity IN tho matters charged us libel
GUS. Should you find that either In the
BHtrtn publication or tho alleged
plcadinRs In the Circuit Court Of The
United States there was completely be-
tween Paul Fourchy and the defending
company, their liability therefor Is solf-
Diary. II you should find them or either
81 tiicin libelOus. Your verdict must be
tinanlnOus, and should be written Oh
the back OF tho petition, verdict for the
plaintiffs SO much, or verdict for de-
PENDANTS, rs the verdict Ia for plaintiff
or defendant, or should you find that
only ono Of the defendants Is liable you
should so state. Should you find that
both are liable for the alleged libel,
your verdict should be for so much in
sOGdO against the defendants.
II IL my duty. gentlemen, to charge
you that.lt was the duty Of the plaintiffs
TO make out their case with legal GER
tninty. II Is not sufficient to warrant
verdict against them, or either Of them.
u you find the evidence goes no further
than TO nuke tho verify OF the 9lleQa-
tons only probable. The proof must
TO . reasonable certainty OF the |
existence and Worthy Of their alleged |
causes ct action. II you flnd that the
plaintiffs have failed TO establish their |
case with legal or reasonable certainty, |
such failure Is not cured by any defect |
n the evidence Of tho defendants. On
y An. 2cS: Byrne vi. Grayson. ID, l57
10 An. 121; - An. 80 and ti6: Briggs
" bitnonds. II An. e9a; Hen. g Dig,
Nos. !, 2. ., ct SEQ. to IL inclusive. tits
= maxim OF the civil law that tho party
who alleges the Affirmation of any
must prove II. And In prac-
lice, you will se.1fronl the above cited
suthoritics. he must provo II with rea-
sonable certainty. IL An. 1O0S-11.l
Where one swears positively to u fact,
md another negatively, thor credibility
md the corroborating circumstances
DeinH equal. the one who swcars affirm
.tively Is TO be believed, BY reason
bile certainty we generally understand
hat degree Of evidence which satisfies
he minds OF the jury Of tho truth of the
act In dispute, 70 tho EXCLUSION Of every
doubt. and which consM-
utes full proof Of tho fact: absolute
or metaphysical certain.
y Il not essential" II Htarkie's Ey.;
}. 1881 The evidence should be OF
uch q conclusive character, as IN
IS tendency at least, excludes the rea-
enable probability Of tho truth Of any
ther hypothesis. These general ideas
'ou must apply TO tho evidences In the
mination Of oil tho evidence. a fair
nd reasonable doubt should linger IN
our minds 40 to tho actual proof Of
ny material allegation, either as to
'aul Fourchy. or the Merchante' Mu-
ual insurance Company, or az W both
olidarily, II IL your duty to give the {
OF. either Of them. as the
asc may be, tho benefit Of It. You are ,
ot bound to give the plaintiffs YER {
lCJ ICr Oil tney demand. oven should {
on conclude that all the PLAINTIFF ]
Legations haze been proved. In such {
II event, you may find for as much
sss, rs your impartial judgments and |
pnsclcnccs may incline You To fix, even
own to one cent. You cannot, by any
gal possibility, under any degree Of ,
hof, award more than Is claimed. FL
nly. gentlemen, act In this important
lIe as you would llave others act
We YOU personally concerned as these 7
plntiffs and defendants arc. Permit
reconsideration Of friendship, or Of .
enaty, malice or bias, to enter into. or /,
iniLnce your minds. Lot Justice, i'm. ,
Ratal Justice, BIS done by YOUR verdict, d,
u lihleavens fall. The case Is Of great ;
{'npiance TO the litlgating parties, and !.
I,a5 In watched with deep interest by !,
inc pss, and the public generally. II :
ms ofpicd much Of the Courts value
PIE vi, and lorely taxed your pa
Ilolce,nd you are expected TO render
sucn Q rdict as good conscience may
Mncti9 and such as may be charac-
ierizcd the comprchensivenes Of It's I
lust,ce Y the clearncss Of It's practical