The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1891-02-11
Supreme Court, Hawaiian Islands.
ID. M. CROWLEY VS.. HAWAIIAN GA
zETTE COMPANY, LIMITED.
Mr.. JUSTICE MoCULLY PRESIDING.
JANUARY 80, 1891.
CHARGE OF THE COURT.

ChAhOE Of I6E
The Court: There is no doubt.
gentlemen of the jury, that case OF
this description should be tried care
fully, conscientiously and judici-
ously; judiciously and strictly &C
cording to the facts of the case here
and to the law relating to libel suits.
And it goes without saying to you
gentlemen of the jury, that no poll
tical prejudice or bias that you may
have towards the Reform Party or
other party which opposed the Re-
form Party, if those were the two
parties of the country, or towards
the Mechanics Union or the Hui Ka-
laiaina, should in this action, the
controversy between individuals,
have any weight whatever.
There are two methods of redress
ing injuries which one is supposed
to receive by publications in a news
paper which arouse angry feelings
and are supposed to infict injury:
one by personal castigation, personal
assault sometimes proceeding to the
last degree of assassination; the
other, is by recourse to the courts of
law, l need not say that the last is
the proper way, and that when suits
are brought, as may say, conscien-
tiously into courts of law, they are
to be very carefully considered.
This complaint 1 ruled in the be-
ginning of the case, or soon after the
beginning, at the close of the plain
tiff's case, you will find to be of and
concerning this plaintiff, d. NJ
Crowley. I think any other ruling
than that would be considered by
you to be extremely technical and
throwing him out of Court without
an opportunity to try his case. 1t is
in three branches, the first charging
that Mr.. Crowley who has been
shown to be d. M. Crowley, "was
engaged in the upholstering bust
ness in this city few years since in
partnership with Mr.. HASTE. The
firm became involved and made an
assignment for the benefit of it's
creditors. A day or two before the
assignment MIR. Crowley and his
partner sewed up lot of valuable
furniture covering, fringes, etc., in
bagging and it was hidden in an up
stars back room under Crowley's
bed. A list of the firms property
was then delivered to the assignee,
emitting the secreted goods. A few
days later Mr.. Crowley and his part
ner had a falling out and the part
ner gave information which led to
the discovery of the goods. Mr..
Crowley then admitted it was firm
property, but claimed that he had
forgotten all about it,
It is not contended by the defen-
dant that these words are not libel
lous per Sc; that is, in themselves,
and therefore it is not necessary to
claim special damage for having
published them. An injury is pre-
sumed without an allegation that the
plaintiff was injured in his credit,
his business, his character, his feel
ings or in any way that would do
him money damage, or damage
which should be compensated by
money. Then comes the question Of
justification.
If the statements here were true
and published not maliciously, i think
that it is understood here, what ma
liciously means, seeking out ever
true incidents in the private lives OF
private men might be maliciousl,
published. But it is claimed her,
that it is not maliciously done, Mr.
Crowley being man before the pub
lie and this occurring in politica
campaign and this paper being th'
organ of the party opposed to Mr.
Crowley. Is it trueg 1t requires
proof, and / charge you that it re
quires satisfactory proof that it wal
true. l will not quite say that it re
quires proof that would convic
Crowley of the crime of as may say
embezzling his own goods, embez
cling goods that had been delivere,
to the assignee in a way by that list
for on trial for the crime reasonable
doubt and many other things com,
in to acquit a person 80 charged, bu
it must be satisfactory proof TO yo'
that it was true. Then it being prov
ed to you to be true and published
without malice, no damages could b
given as to this statement. j vii
merely call your attention to the dii
ferent parts of it again: "The fir
became involved and made an assign
ment for the benefit of its creditor
and that Mr.. Crowley and hi
partner sewed mp a lot {
valuable furniture covering, fringe
etc, in bagging" Whether
is proved that Mr.. Crowley iii
that along with HASTE who is not Q
trial here in any way makes no di
ference. "That il was hidden in a
upstairs back room under Crowley
bed" OF course the gist of the c
Tense is not that il was Crowley
bed, but it would be a very strof
circumstance If it had been Cro'
ley's bedroom and under his bed
bring it home to him. There is ey
dence before you as to whether it W,
Crowley's room at all. On the 9th
hand, there is testimony, and it
testimony in defense by the plant