New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-03-21
THE COURTS.
r. w. KEENE NOT LABELLED.
HIS SUIT AGAINST THE TRIBUNE DECLARED
BY THE GENERAL TERM TO BE

i''~N''''''
By THE GENERAL TERN TO BE
WITHOUT FOUNDATION.
The General Term Of the Supreme Court yester-
day affirmed the judgment Of the Special Term
in sustaining the demurrer Of The Tribune Assoca-
ton to the complaint of Roswell w. Keene in an
action to recover damages for alleged libel pun
lshed in The Tribune several years The publ
cation complained Of stated that an enticng circular
signed by Mr.. Keene had been sent to business
of the city announcing the opening OF stock
books of the Diamond Company Limited. and that
1.-The public respectfully invited to absorb the
shares the number of 20 900 at 800 each that the
president OF a trust company to which reference was
made in the circular said that the trust company
had declined 10 become the financial agent OF the
new corporation or to become in any way Its IMAM
cial sponsor" and that the investigation of the
matter "did not result in a brilliant showing Tor
the new company; with number of other state
ments OF similar character relating TO the COM
pany
The defendant contenied first that there was
nothing lbellous per Sc as to Mr.. Keene in this
publication and second. that there Vas no adequate
allegation Of special damage. These contentious
were sustained at Special Term. and judgment gwen
for the defendant the demurrer
Presiding Justice Van Brunt wrote the opinion OF
the General Term affirming this judgment, con-
CURED in by Justices Follet and Parker. He says:
Upon the part of the appellant it is not claimed
that there is any adequate allegation or speciai
damage but IL is claimed that such allegation i NOT
necessary and that the publication is bellous per
Sc because it refers to the plaintiff in his occupa-
ton, either a lawyer or as a commissioner IN
the organizing OF the corporation referred to IN the
article complained or There does not seem 10 be
any dispute regard to the law; but the diherenGe
OF opinion arises from the application or the We'll
recognized rules of law to the facts alleged Ihere
question but that whatever words nave Ten
dency TO hurt or bring ridcule and contempt on
the plaintiff calculated to prejudice a man
who seeks his livelihood by any trade or business
are actionable. When proved 10 have been spoken
in relation thereto. the action Is supported ana u1-
less the defendant shows lawful excuse, the pam
Tiff Is entitled recover without allegation or PROOF
Of special damage both because the falsty OF the
words and the resulting damage are presumed
But the difficulty with the plaintiffs case IS that
there nothing in the article which shows that any
part of the publication made in respect to any
trade or business in which the plaintiff was en-
gagged Where such is the case an innuendo cannot
change enlarge the plain meaning OF words anu
II is not enough that the language tends TO ihlure
the person in his office, profession or trade. but J.
must be proven to have been spoken in relation
thereto 1t would, therefore appear that the
complaint fatally defective, ana that the luds-
ment appealed from must be affirmed with costs
Mr. Keene appeared in his own behalf. HenIy W
Sackett and William y. McQuaid represented Inc
Trih