The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-12-28
ALONzo BELLS LIBEL SUIT
An Interesting Decision Rendered. by Judge
Speir In Favor OF The sos.


Superior Court.-Alonso Bel agt The Sun
Printing and INbdsh,ug association Special
Term. November. 1877.
Mr.. Is Y. Bsll fofthe plaintiff
Mr.. Willard Bartlett for the defendant
SrE1R, 1.-THE words in the plant charged
as libellous are the following: Civil service
reform has its lapses in the Interior Depart
ment The examining committee which sat on
saturday included DIR. Warren. Chief OF the
Hoard OF Education. and hurredly endorsed
for dismissal list furnished by bureau
officer. 1t included Miss Maggie Warren a
sister Of Dr. Warren. n fact which was not as
certained until yesterday. To-day she was
reinstued. Another fact recently came to light
in regard to Bell. now Assistant Secretary of
the Interior. Last winter Mr.. Duel Commits
sioner OF Patents. was dismissed for letting
tracing be done by various persons under as
sumed names Much scandal was occasioncd
at the time Ivy this Illegal procedure. 1t now
appears that Bells wife tmeaning the plaintiffs
mndcn name" The following Is the innuendo:
That the said defendant by said publication
dill charge. and intended to charge this plain
till with being guilty Of having procured money
for his wife from the United States Government
Tor services illegally performed under an as
The defendant presents his two causes of de-
fnurrcr to the FIRST alleged cause Of action:
| FIRST it docs not state facts sufficient 10 con-
stitu!e cause Of action; second. that thcre
is detect OF parties plaintiff in the non iOndcr
| OF the wife Of the said Alonzo Bell. Although
| the complaint contains an allegation of general
damages in its conclusions. to wit. that by
nrans ~ said false srandalous and malicious
publication the plaintiff has suffered lose in his
good NAM. lame. credit. and reputation. and
had boon brought into stispieion public scan
! dal. contempt, and Disgrace among his neigh
| bore. w.. and has suffered damages thereby in
| tne sum of one hundred Thousand dollars" II
uo' not contain any nNrrmen' that the plaintiff
| has sustained any special damages. In an
acton for libel the plaintiff cannot give evil
! dcnre Of any loss or injury which he has sus-
WneI ny me public alton. unless il be specially
stated in the complaint.
| The language complained " is not actionahe
| ne, 80, When the W lrds charged are not action
! able OF themselves the plaintiN must allcge and
prove that by reason ofthe ibclous matter he
| mas sustain "a some pecun'ary damages. A.
TIE sole Off 20 Of the innuendo is to'explnin ii
cannot introduce new matter nor in any degree
! enlarge the sense Of the words TO viii. il re-
! lntes. The arbitration complained of docs not
| charge tie plaintiff of being guilty OF having
! procured money for his wife from the United
! states Government under an assumed name"
~ stated in the innuendo. There is no aver
nlent IN the publication itself which can pos-i-
| bly Ice called libellous Oy any meaning Of the
| words published having reference To- the plain
til j u, IL" j. not charged with anything al
! feet ing Linn injur,uusly Where There II no am
biguity in the language alleged to be libelous,
No lnhurnro II required 10 give point 10 the
| mnnins me chnrs that the Com missioner Of
/ Patents was dismissed tor PORN ting an Illegal
procedure docs not affc Mr.. Bel nuriously
in any wav. Tn" rosi that can be said so far
~ 4 concerns his wi" j. that The Commissioner
! OF laicnis was dismissed for the Illegal pro''-
! dure OF letting tracing be- done nv persons nm
/ der assumed names. and that tuN plaintiff 5
! Wiic Was one OF Tie pef~ cons paid for doing this
J N'rk IN her maiden name. II ~, ComAi'.-
| siontr % Patents WIS guilty of 10 scandal u
If nm .ut 90 SOC how tAdi uNc IL Mr.. Bell or his
'-rns MIR T.1 ~ l1.. f, ,,',,.t t,,,a iii,a NM,
| MIN. II t." words iHte to MS wi'o. m. most
| they can mean Is thai ia THIS alleged proc, lure
! she wits allowed 20 ,lO fri .ing work for which
! sie Was paid in her waldtn uAAr.
| In business matters a contract or obligation
! may be- entered into by person vs. any name
! 70 the identity Of the individual doc ". Yates
| . Burn. and Ala. 5ii Wat rlury ". Mathur. Is
| m, Gil IL often occurs that a person j. rs
| well known ty one name ~ another. In ltcrt-
| mHrrigi women, are az well known a. the pub
lic by their maiden names - hy'hr names they
| i.e~ UinD upon marriage. am not aware that
III - practice or custom has cVcr been cons red
| OF moral duty or obligation. Under the second
| ground OF demurrer. the non-Joind.r 81 the
wife. II IL b be ohsi rived that n II the Ian
! sugsc complained Of Is actionablc pr Sc the
sui should be- brough; in the name Of tn hus-
| hhni and wife IL II only when the afton ~
| maintained by reason OF special damages To the
| husband That he may sue alone. II il already
| apparent from the foregoing that there L. no.
| lhing IN the publication that affects tho hus-
! hlnd except hy relation Of his wife. Uulpss
She he liballcd thcrn IL not anything IN tho pub
| u cation win h cutltlee him TO r"cov"r. The
| plulutIu Is here claiming damages !Or publ
| i-tlun concerning married woman. and which
! publication concerns him because he is that
! brings the action without joining his wife ms q
/ party, he must admit that the publication L. not
astiouahle pea ~. II the publication j. artiona-
Die PR $50 ne must admit that there 5 defect 4
! either case the defendant is entitled to ludg-
| IL Ut Oh tie demurrer.