The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-02-27
DAUGHTER SUES FATHER FOR
$4,000.
Extraordinary Action for LIBEL Against
a Slanderous Papa.
From the London Daily Nelcs.

From the London Daily Aelcs
Yesterday, before Judge Bayley and
jury the case of Stokes VS.. Stokes came on
on for hearing. 1t was an action brought
by Miss Laura Stokes to recover from her
father the sum of 5000 as damages for
libel and SANDER. 1t appeared that the
plaintiff lived with her father and mother
both in London and Brighton. The libel
consisted in defendant writing letters and
and pawned his goods to the
amount of from $50 to $40 per week:
The plaintiff denied that she had
ever stolen her fathers money or pawned
his goods She had greatly suffered through
her fathers statements. Mrs Stokes, the
mother of the plaintiff, stated that she was
security for her daughters costs in this &C
ton. Her husbands statements about the
plaintiff had become a Dy-word III Brlgh-
ton. The defendant had made those state
ments before the wOrkpeOple in Coventry
street. The trouble between her and the
defendant arose through witness seeing HIM
with woman at the Inventions Exhibition.
The defendant was a very wealthy man.
He was now living with another woman.
She had no vindictive feeling against the
defendant The Islander which he had ut
tered about the plaintiff was known at
Brighton as well as in London.
The defendant (hlr. Stokes was called,
and gave a complete denial to the charge OF
libel He deposed that he had received CON
siderable provOcatiOn from Mrs. Stokes and
the plaintiff, as from his other children. he
was being continually robbed. He charged
his children with the robberies, but only in
a fit of anger. His wife had left hun,
taking the furniture with her, and he was
served with two writs He settled 1t by
making her an allowance of &c per week,
and $500 down. Then he was aSsailed by
his son, who asked him for eos down. He
paid him E125. He was asked to send let
ter of apology, which he did, and, notwlth-
standing this, he was served with writ.
The letter of apology was read in court by
Mr. Kemp, Q. c., who, with Mr.. Rose
Innes, was counsel for the defendant, and
stated that the defendant had no recollec-
ton of saying that Laura (the PLAINTIFF had
robbed him, but if he had he would fully
apologize The letter further stated: God
knows that l have worked hard enough,
and it is very hard that Laura, my
favorite child, should turn against me-"
The action was not brought for
damages but merely from the vindictive
motives of Mrs. Stokes. The latter had not
always been his wife, her real name for
merry being Laura Reynolds He had lived
with her for thirty years His children and
Mrs. Stokes had insulted him and annoyed
him for years, and If he had said anything
against Jhe plamUlH III was only III anger.
Witnesses from the household of the de-
PENDANT depOsed that they had heard the de-
PENDANT call the plaintiff a robber, but they
considered they were only angry words.
Mr. Kemp, @. c., argued that if a verdict
were given for the plaintiff, it should be
with damages of the smallest coin of the
realm. The learned counsel said that the
defendants wife was keeping up the action
merely for revenge, she having quarreled
with the defendant. Mr.. Kemp character
lied her as a cruel, wicked and vindictive
woman. In the result the jury found a YER
dict for the plaintiff; damages, 9250.