Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1889-06-27

Levi DFesbach, "a
Erwin Foor,
George Dir. Pleasant
Conrad Groll,
Fred. Rothenberger, Flatrock
Henry Gehrett, Freedom
]. D. Morey,
E. j. Leist,
THE ATTORNEYS
were: For the State, James p. Ragan, Prose
cutting Attorney; for the defendant, Camp
bell Il Van Campen and Julian H. Tyler.
The defendant was arraigned on and
entered plea of mot guilty" to the follow
ing
INFoRMATIoN:
The State of Ohio, Henry county, SIS.
Probate Court, April term, in the year OF
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
eiQhty-nine, James P. Ragan, Prosecuting
Attorney of the State of Ohio, for the said
County of Henry now here. in said Probate
Court, in and for said county. in the name
ard by the authority, and on behalf of the
State of Ohio, information gives that John
J. Malley, ON the 18th day of May. in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred
and eighty-nine, in the County of Henry
aforesaid, unlawfuIly and maliciously did
write, print and publish in a certain public
newspaper entitled the Peoples Advocate"
a certain false and malicious libel of and
concerning one Henry Bostelman, which
false and malicious libel is as follows, that is
to say:
when man is drunk he is not himself;
we, (meaning thereby the said John j. NAL
ley,) believe Shuster (meaning said Henry
Bostelman) was full when he snaked in
(meaning stole) Harvey Goon's pig; (meaning
thereby that said Henry Bostelman stole
Harvey Goon's pig.) If he was sober he'd
have taken (meaning stolen) pen, the old
SOW and gone back for the trough. Shuster
must have been full, (meaning thereby that
said Henry Bostelman must have been drunk. J
But stop; he was just establishing charac-
ter"
And in certain other part of said news
is contained the following false and ma
licious libel, which the said John j. Malley on
the 18th day of May, 1883, at the county afore-
said, unlawfully and maliciously did write,
print and publish of and concerning said Hen
ry Bostelman that is to say:
"There are extenuating circumstances in
nearly every case. This case of Shuster
(meaning said Henry Bostelman), appro-
priating (meaning thereby stealing a pig is
no exception nike likes like,' and Shuster
(meaning said Henry Bostelman,) knew the
Contrary to the form of the statute in such
cases made and provided, and against the
peace and dignity of the State Of Ohio.
JAMES p. RAGAN,
Prosecuting Attorney, Henry county.
The State, to maintain the charge, intro
duced in evidence the paper containing al
lodged libelous articles, proved their print
ing and circulation by the defendant, their
falsity, and also introduced other publica-
tions in the same paper by the defendant for
the purpose of showing malice on his part.
The defendant introduced but one witness,
Mr.. Harvey Coon, for the purpose of proving
the truth of the charge made against Mr..
Bostleman, but failed utterly in doing so
Mr.. Goon's testimony showing nothing more
than that, some eleven years ago there was a
dispute between himself and Mr.. Bostleman
as to the ownership of pig, each having
owned and lost one similar ins age, size and
appearance, and which was finally taken by
Mr.. Coon.
The case having been rested. Judge Dom
nelly delivered the following
CHARGE TO THE JUDY:
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY: Your duty as Jur-
ors, is to render verdict in this case, from the
evidence under the rules of law which will
hereafter give you, and when that is done,
your responsibility herein ceases. The duty
Of the court is to instruct you ON the
law in this case and dispose of your verdict
whatever it may be. On or about the
28th day of May, 1889, an information was
filed in this court by the Prosecuting Attorn-
oh dc foil thaH nvk
read the information as printed above.
The Section of the Statute under which this
information was drawn reads as follows:
malicious libelo or concerning another, shall be
fined not more than i've hundred dollars, or i'm
prisoned not more than six months, or both; but
nothing shall be deemed q libel unless there is o
publication thereof" (Revised Statutes, Section
$685.
The State must prove to you, beyond a
reasonable doubt, all the elements necessary
to constitute the crime of libel; that is: that
on or ab0nt the time mentioned in said in
County, Ohio, the defendant did publish of
and concerning said Henry B0stleman, in a
certain newspaper called "Ihe Peoples Ad-
vocate,o false or malicious libel.
"a libel, in reference to individual injury
may be defined to be false or malicious
publication against an individual, either in
print or writing or by pictures, with intent
to injure his reputation and expose him to
public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, words
of ridicule or contempt which merely tend to
lessen man in public esteem will support a
suit for libel, because of their being embod-
led in more permanent and enduring form
and of the increased deliberation and malig-
nifty of their publication and of their tenden-
cy to provoke breaches of the public peace,
or to deprive him of the benefits of public
confidence or social intercourse"
Gentlemen, applying what have just said
to all the evidence. it is for you then to say
whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty
of the crime charged.
/ say the State must satisfy your minds
beyond reasonable doubt, and now say to
you that reasonable doubt may be defined
to be-"when full and candid consideration
of all the evidence produces q conviction of
guilt to moral certainty; but a mere capti-
GUS, ingenious, or artificial doubt should not
prevail" Ei& 4I{
The Section OF the Statute which have
read to you says: "Whoever writes, prints,
or publishes any false or malicious libeI, DC" !"
l therefore say to you that the State must
to nabsh Ss
and that it was either false or malicious.
II you find from all the evidence, beyond a
reasonable doubt. that the defendant did
publish the alleged libel, and that it was
false, or that j. was published from ma
licious or wicked motive, then your verdict
should be guilty; but If the State has not sat
isfied you beyond reasonable doubt of all
the matters which have before referred to,
then your verdict should be not guilty.
For the purpose of enabling you 70 deter
mine whether the allie ged publication was
either false or malicious, you may take into