The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1891-02-11

4
erty was delivered to the assignee,
emitting the secreted goods. The
truth OF that you have heard. The
list has not been and cannot be pro-
duced and that is nothing to charge
MIR. Anterior or to imply that he has
withheld paper. 1t is an old tran
saction, very old transaction, done
with SO far as the business part of il
is concerned with the creditors and
it might not be produced, SO that you
lack certainly the certainty of proof
which the paper would afford itself.
MIR. Anterior has testified, i under
stood, according to that list which
was produced here that these articles
bad been included in it and then
taken away from the goods; that is
for your consideration, whether it is
SO proved; that the goods were on
the list and then distracted; that
few days later Mr. Crowley and his
partner had a falling out, that / have
no doubt that has been proved, and
the partner gave information. No
matter who gave information in this
case, the information is not before
you in this case. That In conse-
quence of the information Mr.. Ather-
ton made some search there with
some others and they were found
there; that Mr.. Crowley then admit
ted that it was firm property but
claimed that he had " forgotten all
about it." There is broad conflict,
and it is for you to be satisfied from
all the testimony and all the circuln-
stances that Mr. Crowley did admit
having done it, having secreted the
goods. So that upon this first item
of the complaint you would find
verdict for damages for the plaintiff
if it is not proved satisfactorily to
your minds that it is true, and further
that if true the publication was
without malice, and in regard to
that a proof of want of malice
would go in connection with the
truth of it to relieve the defendant
from damages altogether. 1t would
further go, If it didn't do that, to q
mitigation of damages. OF course
publication would have a different
application under one state of cir
cumstances as to malice and differ
emit one under another. 1t says un-
der our statute, and it is the statute
relating to criminal prosecutions for
libel, which this is not. that: In
every prosecution for writing or pub
fishing a libel, the defendant may
give in evidence in his defence upon
the trial the truth of the matter con-
tanned in the publication charged to
be libelous; provided, however, that
such evidence shall not be deemed a
justification, unless it shall be
further made to appear on the trial
that the matter was published with
good motives and for justifiable
ends"
Coming to the second part of the
complaint, that, after this little
episode Mr.. Crowley took to stump
ing the country in the interest of
temperance reform under the aus
pieces of w. @. T. q. This palled
upon his tastes after awhile and he
proceeded to organize troup of ma
tive hula girls at Kohala. He thought
that the show would take better
if the girls were dressed in silk tights
and opera boots. He accordingly
ordered them through a Honolulu
merchant, but as his credit was not
sufficient to get them, he induced a
Kohala friend to guarantee payment.
Meanwhile Hawaiian Opera did not
pay the dividends expected of it. The
tights came, Mr.. Crowley left his
friend in the lurch and the friend
had to pay for them. That friend
has very sober recollection of the
event"
As to the charge that the plaintiff
in this case proceeded TO organize a
troupe of native hula girls and to get
tights for them and so on, that is not
in itself libellous per Sc, there would
have to be special allegation OF
damages. will illustrate: IL might
not injure him in the upholsterine
business, might not injure man tc
have been engaged in the show bust
ness. even in a low class show bust.
ness. The point is that he does not
allege specially that it did iniure him
in his business, and unless there il
an allegation of that kind he could
not recover. II would undoubtedly
iniure very much the character we
will say of any minister of religion
and of many other persons in societ,
and in professions; l think il woult
injure lawyer as well; it would in
iure Judge to have il said that h.
had been in some low show business
or show business we will say, but
person in alleging such libel woul'
have to set forth his injury, an
allege, for instance, that it had pre-
vented him from getting employment
in his profession, or caused his dis
charge from his situation. But ther
is no allegation in this complain
that the plaintiff has been injured
his business by it being published 9
him that he had organized or a
, tempted to organize hula troup.
The latter part of the charge, hoy
ever, is libellous per SC, because
makes charge against his credi
and if it injured the credit of
, tradesman, take it for granted tn
it is not to be controverted that M
Crowley is a tradesman, man doil
; business to some extent upon cred
: at all events that injury to his cred
4 would be an injury to him, 80 it
I