New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-10-20
A VERDICT FOR MISS PRESCOTT.
THE SUN OF $40, 800 AWARDED.

THE SUM OF $40, 800 AWARDED.
POINTS OF JUDGE RUssCLL's CHARGE TO THE JURY
AN HOUR AND A HALF SPENT BY THE JURY
IN DEuBERATlON.
The trial of the action of Marie Prescott
against Sinclair Tousey pres lent Of the American News
Company for $4,000 damages sustained by
OF a libel printed in dramatic paper called NWn
Ornkie and circulated by the defendant came TO an
end Yesterday at 2:3O ~ The jury after deliberat
ing for hour and half returned verdict In favor of
appanse from tie spectators viii drowned the pound
ing OF the Judges gavcl Ex-Judge Fullerton Of
council for tho defendant at took the customary
preliminary steps for an appeal OF the case to the Gen
eral Term Of the Superior Court
The [, ,timOny and arguments In the having been
concluded on Wednesday afternoon, Judge Russell
began his charge to the jury Immediately after the call OF
Judge Fullerton took three four exceptions to his
rulings but Mr.. Stafford took After giving the le
gal definitions OF libel Judge Russell stated certain things
that were uOcllOuS. person VINO had sunt red from
the publication OF Dt had rsht OF action not only
against the writer OF the article ana the paper which
printed IT, but also against any person or corporation
be difference in the extent or the ahuy in the
latter case according the person and corporation
oed the writer The writer might be he'd in punitive
damages but not so the persons who nhocently, gnO
ranty and without express malice published or clrcu-
lated the libel. Theirs only implied malice. II
fine defendant disseminated libel without Just he
was a anf dama@cs if the nry chose 70 mposo
such for the adopted in the defence OF the
and for setting up Abeous matter tlat was not proved
"a nasniach as the justice of the law has been as
saw that the law il Just and right. Great privileges
carry great responsibilities If a corporation has
system, and has means 10 do work so well and quickly
that no one else compete with it, 1t is to it's advan
and risks and responsibilities which the privilege
brings" If the jury held the article as published to be
ibelous the plaintiff made prima facc case by PROV
ing the publication and that related to herself It
necessary for her to do more and tho burden OF
proof was on the defendant either to justify the publ
cation show such facts I'm mitigation as he could. If
the JUICY believed the testimony offered on the point the
les a ia tf1
the plaintiff sufficiently made out. 1t then re
maincd for the jury to determine whether the article
was hbeOus, and this point they had heard what all
had say. Not one word of testimony had been offered
show that such charges as the article protested to
repel had been made by any paper or that it any
thing more than creation of the writer's own mind
Nevertheless it would be lbeJus to reprint libel
taken from another paper. and the jury would not he
prccudcd from saying that the real purpose OF such
republication not to defend the person ibeled but
TO give wider circulation 10 the original libel IL the
Jury found that the libel written such spirit and
was calculated TO produce that contempt in mankind
which the law forbade Judge Russell charged that they
must lind damages for the plaintiff in some sum- even
though the defence Justified all except small part.
The justification In the was not broad as the
alleged libel That charged that neradcublo stigma
had been placed on the pantIs TWO children and that
had paid to have done For this Justification
had been attempted In fixing tho sum the jury were
10 be guided largely ny thelr conclusions with reference
that portion of the alleged libel for which Justification
had been set up IN civil actions for libel truth was
good defence as far as 1t went In this case, however,
Inc defence had attempted 10 justify only to pO
ton OF the artcle namely that the plaintiff had become
certain mans mistress tils lact were proved she
would not be entitled 10 any damages for that portion of
thp
consider the testimony that subject in mitigation of
damages but must discard IL altogether. 10 was rather
in aggravaton than I'm mitigation Judge Russell then
reviewed the evidence on this point at length and
instructed the jury To the amount o. crCdcnco which
could given to Haryicr and Miss Prescott in their
antnconistic statements concerning their relations and
the letters introduced in evidence Whoever of the two
spoke falsely to these letters he thought ought he
dscrcdcd entirely. There was no well defined rule by
which 10 estimate the value Of womans good name
II the jury came to the matter OF damages he know no
other monitor than their eonscicnces.
The jury retired for consultation at 1858 p M.
q nm tbaf
they would not bo ont for than hour and before
one O'Clock the spectators had again packed the
Al 80 the Jury entered and the foreman announced
verdict for the plaintiff for Sl2.jO0 There quick
response OF applause from the spectators which was
hl-hcd In n moment IN Difference 10 the Court. Mr.
Fullerton and quietly took the papers in the case
from the foreman. MIR. Stafford only smiled. Miss
Prcscotts oldest boy stood at her side When she hoard
to her eyes, but she showed great command over her
emotions. She leaned over the lad, who stood up
straight rs an arrow III his clothes OF caders gray and
said Kiss me Inc lad pcnt over hcr kissed her
lips and then made way for two or three friends uclud
ing her counsel. who pressed forward To congratulate
her Mr. PcrZe. who sat by, mnde no demon. ira
ton and In another minute she had lett the court room
Mr. Fullerton moved Tor new trial. Judge Russell
denied the motion. The counsel thrn moved TO set
aside the verdict the ground Of excessive damngcs
This motion was also denied and exceptions were noted
in boh lie then moved Tor of execution
thirty days and the motion WAS granted. Mr.
Stafford in hoali 81 Ills client moved iOI the customary
allowance OF hyc per cent ON the verdict for the
motion granted and the court adjourned.
stated that tho Jury had ngrccd to bring i'm n
handsome verdict in favor OF the plaintiff within ten
after they left the box aud that all the rect OF
the time occupied In convincing majority Of them
that the ul amount OF $4,000 asked for excessive
Haryer was not present IN the court at all yes
teray; his absence many people attributed TO his fear
OF arrest either for perjury on the in or for criminal
when the jury came IN strengthened that impress
sion. Miss PresCotts counsel served notice the
American News Company of another action for damages