Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1884-04-25
Friday. April 20. 1884
The Libel suit ENDED.

A Jury That Cannot Agree-Nenrly
Four Hours In Sesaion-seven For
Conviction and Five For Acquittals
When the Superior court opened yesterday
morning State Attorney Doolittle continued
his argument for the State. He paid COM
pliment to Mr.. Sperry, and in closing said
that the defense would laugh them to scorn
If they did not say that the articles which
appeared in the Union were abusive.
At 1O:45 Chief Justice Park began his
charge to the jury. He said: Gentlemen of
the jury; The original complaint in this case
contains two counts, but the first has been
abandoned by the public prose eutor. To the
second count you must therefore confine your
attention. This substantially declares that if
any person shall write or print any
abusive or indecent matter concerning any
person, he shall be punished thus and so.
Now it appears that the matter so classed by
the State was published in paper called the
New Haven Union of March 6, 1884. 1t ap-
pears further that Troup, one of the defend
ants, wrote part of this article; that Butler
wrote the remaining part; it also appears thtt
both parties are editors of the paper, and, in
addition that Troup is the proprietor,
and saws he is responsible for the entire ar
ticle. The defendant Butler admits his re-
sponsibility for the part he took in the mat
ter 1t further appears that the article was
published and scattered broadcast. These
facts are admitted by the defense. So the
ruling question is reduced to the inquiry
Does the article in question contain Indecent
or abusive matter of or concerning N. ID.
Sperry, as charged in the complaint indie
cent and abusive are the words of the statute
It is well known to you all that there are
different grades of indecent language, SO 1t
becomes necessary to determine what the law
is concerning this matter. On this subject
quite large number of requests have been
made by the defense, number larger than
necessary, some of which will present to
YOU
Here the court noted and read eight of the
citations of law presented by the defense.
After he had finished these, Chief Justice
Park continued: ''Such, gentlemen, is the
law in relation to the case. You will now
consider whether the charges made in the
complaint come within the meaning of the
law that has been read to you.
1.-The first charge is, Our genial postmas-
ter again appears in his favorite character
of Uriah Heep, SO very humble and withal
so innocent. Again appearsl' It is inn
piled by this statement that he has appeared
before and appeared in his favorife char-
acter of Uriah Heep. It implies that
he has acted in the character of Uriah
Heep SO often that he has not only become
familiar with it, but attached to it. 1t is his
favorite character. It becomes peces sary.
gentlemen, for you to know what the nature
of this character was. You have had the
books before you detailing the character of
| Uriah Hsep for you to determine how he is
represented there. It is claimed on the part
| of the State that Charles Dickens repres ents
| this character as an Infamous and detestable
character, and that he thereby represented
class of persons who under the garb of
humility disguised malice and hatred. It is
for you, gentlemen of the jury, to pass upon
| this
In relation to the second count, which
charges in this wise IF We had proper
civil service system with proper discipline
| over its officers. any federal official who
play ed the part that Postmaster N. D Sperry
| did at Hartford Tuesday would be promptly
cashiered' 1t is well known, it is said, that
/ Sperry is the postmaster in New Haven, an
| important federal position under the govern
| ment. And yet here it is directly said shat
| Mr.. Sperry has been guilty of violation of
| the duties of his position and ought to be
4 cashiered, and if we had proper civil
vice he would be. This is saying We had not
| a proper civil service Suppose it is written
that A. B. is a murderer and ought to be
hanged, and would be if the officers did their
| duty. Does this initiate at all the charge
| that A. B. is a murderer and ought to be
| hanged? 1 leave this for on to say, gentle
| men of the jury.
''The third charge ia on this wise: For the
| postmaster of New Haven to take this promi-
nent and deliberate part in insulting the
Governor is a gross outrage upon decency.
Connecticut has had governors who would
| heve brought such a matter to the attention
| of the President, etc. The same remarks
| which made in regard to the second charge
| apply to this This implies that it ought to
be done, that Sperry vas engaged in a con-
spiracy to insult the Governor of the State.
| ''You will consider, gentlemen, whether
the language set forth in the complaint is
| gross enough to come within the limitations
| of the law. If it is, the accused are guilty.
| Unless the matter is true unless it IL fair
| criticism of what the postmaster did, the &C
cused are guilty. A fair criticism is what
is called up as a matter of duty. Now, are
| the charges sustained by the truth? First We
| have the claim made by the defense that on
the Tuesday in question one Birdsall grossly
insulted the Governor. Then comes their
claim that Postmaster Sperry was connected
with that insult and aided and allotted it.
! Not that he was there In person. or that he in
person offered any insult to the Governor.
But in the law an alder and abet
tor in crimes stands on the same ground as
| the principal perpetrator and no better.
What is the evidence in the case relied upon
by the accused? Why it is said that the post
master went in the same train, in the same
car, to Hartford with BirdsaIl. They did not
sit together and got off one after the other.
There the evidence ceases. It is said he
admits going to the Office of the Hartford Tel
egram, which Birdsall then owned,
that he was at the New Ha-
ven depot that night and that the Birdsall
account of the ejsctment first appeared in
the columns of the Palladium, in which were
also inserted the Waller private letters to
RirdSQll Thoa0 Of
which the defence claim show that the post
master aided and abetted BirdsaH. This is
all that is relied upon, except, perhaps, that
Sperry had great influence over the PalIa-
dunn.
"You have heard, gentlemen, how this has
been answered by the State. In the first
place, without any explanation whatever, the
State says that the foregoing evidence falls
far short of duplicating Sperry with the
Birdsall trouble. Mr.. Sperry swears he was
| implicated neither directly or indirectly, and
further Editor Benton, of the Palladium, ex-
plains why Mr.. sperry was at the depot the
| night Benton met Birdsall for the interview
He went to point out Birdsall Benton did
! the work of the interview, and testified that
no one controlled him. This is claimed by
| the State.
You are to determine whether these
charges are true. II true you will render a
verdict for the accused. II not true then
there arises another question and that is
| was this act which is claimed by the State
to be hbelous, was this fair, honest criti-
| cism upon a public man and on public
| matter? If it was. why then it was not libel
GUS. But criticism must not be clothed in
the gar6 of malice.
"Of course, if you find the act of Birdsall
| was the act of Sperry, then perhaps the criti-
cism was deserved. It is claimed by the &C
cused that he wrote the article in good faith
and that he considered Mr. Sperry was try
ing to make political capital out of the insult
to the Governor, and that he, being a Dem
ocrat, sought to keep up his end. Now it is
said by the State that this statement is not
made in good faith and that the defendant
has said many hard things against the Gov
ernor and charged him with breaking up the
Democratic party of the State and then this
defendant publishes broadcast through the
community.
The case really is a very important one
to the accused, of course to the State to the
community and its safety" The court here
referred to Judge Fosters opinion in the