The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1884-07-30

ont oil the painful
s. Equity will restrain the unauthorized publi-
cation Of private letters the ground of violation
Of confidence and injury 70 the feelings.
Cooley on TOrts, pages S56 3.
Kerr, Ini, pages 1873,
Pomeroy' Eq. JUS Sec. lS5s.
2Story's Eq. Jus, Secs 9t6 and 9iS.
BT rHE COURT.
The first question to be decided is, whether this
complaint is TO be judged according to well settled
rules concerning civil actions for libel II II Is
then il is clear that the demurrer must be sus-
tained; for the complaint does not aver that the
words in the publication are defamatory. More
over they are not alleged to be false. A libel, ac
cordinC TO statutes, iSa qualification IN writing
print by picture, statue sign or representation
other than by words merely spoken, which direct
ly tend TO injure the fame, reputation or good
name of another person, and TO bring him into
disgrace, abhOrrence odiun, hatred, contempt or
ridicule, or cause him to be excluded from society
II has been settled by long course OF legal de
cisiOns that defamatory words are those which
produce any perceptible injury 10 the reputation
Of another. These, if false, are actionable, and
general damages may be recovered of the person
using them. without proof that any particular
damage has followed their use.
Il is also settled that the fact that the words
employed by the defendant have perceptibly in
jured the plaintiffs reputation may be presumed
from the nature Of the words themselves. Also,
If the words, being written and published or
printed and published, are in any way dlsparagng
to the plaintiff and tend to bring him into ridicHlo
or contempt.
As above stated the publication complained Of
is not alleged 10 be defamatory. 1t IS therefore
unnecessary TO consider whether it has in fact that
character For this reason alone the plaintiff can
not recover general damages on his complaint, as
for a libel. Nor can the plaintiff recover special
damages as for a libel, for he has failed to aver
them In the particular manner required OF tho
pleader in libel suit
/ deem it unnecessary to discuss the question
whether or not considering our statute, the truth
Of the ublished matter Is a complete Tense TO
civil action, for the complaint does not charge the
matter published TO be false. and IL purporting TO
be a copy of a letter written by the plaintiff him
self, could not well be alleged 10 be false.
pass now TO consider whether the plaintiff has
cause Of action in his case stated in the COM
piRint, independently Of the law governing hbels.
This is a novel question and may be thus stated:
letter was written by merchant In Honolulu
twenty years ago as an apology and IN order 10
settle and compromise a suit for slander. The
letter written to person not the defendant.
and closes with the statement, Il beg to enclose
herewith n check for 500 in your favor TO pay the
expenses you have already been put 30 in the suit
against me, and also TO pay for 100 printed copies
of the apology should you desire to print the same,
in order that You may have an opportunity, by
circulating them, of repairing any injury you may
have suffered by what have said or DONE Per
mission was thus accorded by the writer to the
receiver of the letter to print 100 copies of the
letter and TO circulate them, presumably among
those who might have been unfavorably affected
tOwardsthe receiver by the plaintiff s statements.
The complaint charges that the publication of
this letter by the defendants was with the intent
TO iniure the character. feelings and reputation of
the plaintiff and that II was done without the
knowledge or consent of the receiver, Mr.. W. l..
Green, or.of the plaintiff, and that the defendants
vrongfully and iniuriousy printed and circulated
a large number, that Is 10 saw several hundred
copies, and delivered and distributed them 10
divers residents in Honolulu and other persons
residing in this Kingdom
In considering whether the plaintiff can recover
damages for this conduct of the defendants, these
allegations must be taken as true.
Judge Story discusses the question as TO whether
courts Of equity ought TO restrain by injunction
the publication of mere private letters on business
or on family concerns, or on matters Of personal
friendship and not strictly falling within the line
of literary compositions Story Eq. Jur Secs. ?i6
7-S-9,
This learned iurist saws. Sec. giC: "ln moral
view, the publication of such letters, unless IN
cases where IL is necessary to the proper yindica
tiOn Of the rights conduct Of tue party against
unjust claims injurious imputations, Is perhaps
one Of the most odious breaches of private CORES
pondence, Of social uuty, and OF honorable feelings
which can we'll be imagined. 1t strikes at the root
of all that free aud mutual interchange OF advice,
opinions and sentiments between relatives and
friends and correspondents which is 50 essential
10 the well-being OF society and to the spirt OF
liberal courtesy and refinement 1t may involve
whole families IN great distress from the public
di splay Of facts ard circumstances which were
reposed in the bosoms of others under the deepest
and most affecting confidence that they should tot-
ever remain inviolable seerets-n
Sec. &T,- 1T would be a sad repraoch to English
and American jurisprudence If courts OF equity
could not inierpose in such cases. and If the rights
Of property of the writers should be deemed TO
exist only when the letters were literary compusi-
tions. If the mere sending Of letters e third
persons is not 10 be deemed, in cases OF literary
composition. total abandonment of the rights of
property by the sender nforfori, the act Of send
ing them cannot be presumed to be an abandon
ent thereof in cases where the very nature Of the
anFfr frnnd shin