The daily gazette., 1880-12-07
Eros. r..s.ra.y.- L.s. na,.,oa.
THE SUPERIOR COURT.
THE LIBEL SUIT AT LAST
REACHES THE JURY.
AN EXHAUSTIVE oHAEsR BY CHIEF
JUSTICE coMKaYs.

NBw CASTLE, Dec. 9.
When Court assembled, at 10
O'Clock, this morning, Judge Wales
appeared upon the bench, for the
first time since the recent dastardly
assault made upon him in Whining
ton.
The jury in the libel suit of the
Delaware State Fire and Marine Ins
surance Company were called, and
Chief Justice Comegys at once pro-
ceeded to deliver to them the charge
of the Court. The charge was
thorough and exhaustive, and in
length would occupy six or seven
columns OF the GAZETTE.
The charge opened with citation
OF the libellous publications, and said
that there expressions, by themsel YES,
are without point or expression, but
by inuendo they refer to tue plaintiff
in this cause, and mean to infer that
it is a fraudulent corporation. The
charge next reviewed the pleas Of not
guilty and Of justification set up by
the defense, and said that in relation
to the first plea 1t devolves upon the
plaintiff to prove that the publications
are libels, that the defendant publish
cd them, and that they relate TO the
plaintiff and damage was occasioned
| bY them.
| Label, said the court, 10 variously
defined, but the general legal accepta-
tion of the term is /: Anything written
or printed, in words, signs, caricatures
/ N Iata r.a A.sA L.,
or corporation, and by imputation
tending to injure him or it in reputa.
tiop, degrade him or it in society, OF
bring him or it into contempt, public
hatred or ridicule. Applying this rule
there is no doubt the words used iu
this case are libellous, and if express.
cd in malice, are subject to action
The next step is to prove that the de.
fendant published them.
Tue charge next reviewed the evl
dence produced by the plaintiff to con
meet the defendant with the writing
and SAID # the jury did not deem TIL,
sufficient proof they should return &
verdict Of "not guilty." and that woulc
end the matter.
On this ground the court revieweC
from one Of the papers offered in ev
dence, containing extracts from certain
Insurance journals referring To the de
feDdant as tie anthor of the libels
which are editorially commented upoI
aud endorsed by the Every Evening.
On the ground of malicious publica
tion the court charged that even il tn,
jury deemed the defendants charges wer,
true, but decided that In their publica
I Ian hA .0fs.. a.A L. lt.s..
tives, they should find for the plnintlf.
The charge next reviewed at length
the testimony offered by the defence il
relation to the fraudulent character o
he plaintitf,and the plaintiffs evidenc'
rebuttal. As result Of this review
was declared that the Mckee and Mich
OILS farms IN Kent County, appeared
with the exception of one item Of testi
mony, TO be worth the face value Of III
mortgages held upon them as securitle
by the Company. The Gray farm pre-
sents slight discrepancy of testimon,
in regard to its value, the North Murder
kill Hundred farm is disallowed by th
plaintiff as forming any part Of its assets
aud the Clinton County farm is given
nominal value by the plaintiffs Presi
ident, Mr.. Bright, whose testimony Ii
this respect is not impeached.
In regard to the value of the Dauphil
county land there is a great discrepan
cy of testimony, which the court sal,
the jury must either reconcile or Civ
faith to those witnesses, who, unde
the circumstances, they deemed mos
worthy of credit.
The DuPage county, ILL.,, land, iron
the testimony, was held 10 be worth
, less as an asset.
The report of the Insurance Compa
MES committee, and the examination
by Insurance Commissioner McFe
were next considered at length, and il
regard to the former the court sal
the question was whether the iur
ought to consider the reputation of tn
plaintiff, based upon the reports G
other companies, who made no exami
nation beyond the statement of th
Maryland Insurance Commiss oner.
Concluding, the court spoke OF th
point presented by Mr.. Bates, of couu
sci for the defendant, and said that ed
tors and publishers have no privileges i
this State not common to auy body elst
and are not entitled TO immunity /
charges of libel.
AT ll:25 o'clock the jury retired, an
argument was then resumed In the Glen
son will case.