The Hawaiian gazette., 1893-11-07

and directly wrongfully injurious to
another: for instance < To
prevent another, by indirect and sim
lister means, from exercising his
trade"
Defendant further contends that
to be libellous the publication must
impute to the complainant Grim
inal ofense. The statute defines as
libellous any printed publication
which directly tends to injure the
fame, reputation or good name of
another person, and to bring him into
disgrace, adherence, odium, hatred,
contempt or ridicule, or to cause
him to be excluded from society"
This statute clearly does not confine
libels to publications which impute
criminal offense. And it was so
held by Mr. Justice McCully in ReE
Cs. Gibson, 6 Haw., 80. See also State
Us. Spear, IL r. l., 324
1t is not for us to say whether the
publication in question directly tends
to ipjure the reputation of Claus
Spreckels and to bring him into dis
grace, odium, ETC., nor is it for Us to
say just what the publication was in
tended or understood to mean. We
have only to say whether, as read in
the light of properly averred extrinsic
facts necessary to explain its mean
ing, it is capable of a libellous mean
ing, and whether such extrinsic facts
are properly averred. Ii is for the
jury to pass upon the actual meaning
of the words, and to say whether
they are in fact libellous unless the
Court must find by an inspection of
the Indictment that the publication
in the light of properly averred ex-
trinsic facts is incapable of libel
lous meaning. Bgagg Us. Sturt, 10 @.
B.. 899.
We think that the words in ques-
ton are capable of a libellous mean
ing. They may, in view of possible
extrinsic facts known to the reader,
be taken to impute to Claus Spreckels
the otfense Of instigating, or conspir-
ing with, others to commit seditious
offense, as set forth in the innuendoes
in the first count, or the offense of in
stigating, or conspiring with, others
to commit the offense of treason, as
set forth in the innuendoes in the
second count, or they may be taken
to impute the doing of acts, hostile
to the existing Government, which
are not covered by any penal statute.
1t is for the jury to say whether the
true meaning of the words has been
attached to them in the innuendoes.
Being of the opinion that the pub
LEGATION is susceptible of libelous
meaning in the light of possible ex-
trinsic facts, it remains for US to say
whether such facts are properly
averred. Where words are used in
their ordinary sense, no extrinsic
facts need be averred to show their
meaning, but where, as in the pres
emit case, they are alleged to be used,
allegorically, in a sense which could
not be understood but for the knowl
edge of certain extrinsic facts, it is
necessary to aver those facts in order
to show on the face of the indict-
ment the meaning of the words. If
the words standing alone are ambig
uous, there must be in general three
things to show their true meaning,
N averments of extrinsic facts, which
explain the meaning of the words,
~ coHoquia, connecting the words
with those facts, and 81 innuendoes,
pointing out the meaning of the
words when read in the light of those
facts. The publication in question is
ambiguous. Read in their literal
sense, the words do not refer to Claus
Spreckels, nor are they of libellous
nature. Certain extrinsic facts are
averred to show that the words refer
to Claus Spreckels, and there is
cOELOquium that the words were pub
lished of and concerning Claus
Spreckels, but there is no colloquium
that they we're published of and con-
corning the extrinsic facts set forth
in the averments, nor are there any
averments of extrinsic facts, or co.,
loquia, to show that the words are
used in libellous sense. Innuendoes
alone are not sufficient; they may ex-
plain what already appears upon the
record as ground for the explana-
ton, but they cannot add to, or alter
the sense of the expressions as usual
ly understood. The publication in
question is allegorical or ambiguous
as to other matters. for instance, as
to the country and the political
parties or situation in the country of
which, as well as to the person of
whom, it is written. There should
be averments and collOquia to explain
the allegorical language. If the
indictment contained proper aver
ments and cONoquia to show that
the meaning set forth in the
innuendoes might reasonably be
put upon the words of the publica-
ton, it would be for the jury to
say whether the averments are estab-
lished by the evidence, whether the
cOHoquiG are true, and whether the
express the real meaning
of the words. See Rer as. Horne,
Cowp. 672; Van Vechten Cs. Hopkins, 5
Johns. oil; Mir Os. Woodland, II