The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-04-04
The Law REGARDING Libel
Laid Down by Judge Gunster In the
Action Against Free Press.
VERDICT AGAINST DIX. KENNEDY
Jury Awards Mrs. Aswell $3.50 In Her Suit
Against tho City-verdict Returned
Against Coal Operators Stroud ana
Chamberlain-Othcr Cases Heard.

Much speculation was taken by at
torneys and others about the court In
what the verdict of the jury would be
| In the civil libel suit for damages in
the sum OF $4,000. brought by Dr. w. +.
Kennedy, of Prlceburg. against Pro-
prietor II. A. Beamish and Editor Il. j.
Lynott, of the Sunday Free Press. The
jury filed into the main court room at
$50 yesterday afternoon. Judge Gun
ster was on the bench and took their
verdict. which was In favor Of the de-
PENDANTS Charles F. Van Mort was
foreman of the jury.
When colArt convened yesterday
morning Judge Gunster delivered his
charge. He spoke very carefully about
the liability OF the defendants, and re-
fused to affirm the point of the plain
tiffs attorney which held that all con-
cerned in the publication of the Free
Press were responsible for damages
sustained by the publication of the
alleged libel. Court ruled that only
the person or persons concerned
in the publication of libel
are responsible to the law for their acts.
To publish an article reporting that
man had libeled another is actionable
only per Sc; that is to say the action
must be brought against the individual
who wrote the article. Judge Gunster
told the jury that unless they We're con-
WINGED that the article in question did
not charge DR.. Kennedy with having
written or published something defam-
atory about others, they could not
find a verdict for the plaintiff.
The article stated that DIR. Kennedy
Is reported to have said" certain things.
Court charged that If the article only
meant that DR.. Kennedy spoke the
words, but did not write or publish
them. he could not recover damages,
because the article did not contain a
libel on him personally; it is only
alleged to have reported that DR.. Ken
nedy libeled somebody else. The jury
was out celebrating only few hours.
Another Verdict Against the City.
Mrs Fannie Aswell, of Tenth street,
whose suit for damages against the city
of Scranton was tried before Judge
Mayer, was awarded a verdict of $3.50
yesterday by the jury that listened to
the evidence in the case. The testi-
mony was the most peculiar ever heard
in trespass suit, based on damages
done to land ever tried in these courts.
AS many as a half dozen witnesses on
the part of the plaintiff swore unre-
servedly that Mrs. Aswelrs property
has been damaged to the extent OF
$1,000 by the grading of Tenth street;
and just as many on the defendants
side maintained that the property has
been enhanced in value $4,000. The jury
viewed the property and their verdict
was, no doubt, based on their own tudg-
ments. She sued for 81 200.
In the case of Charles p. Hallock, of
Carbondale, against Coal Operators
Stroud and Chamberlain, the verdict
rendered was sl,53622. This includes
the damages sustained by the plaintiff
in the amount Of coal mined from un-
der his land and the loss to his house
incident to the cave-in which followed
the mining away of the coal. Hallock
sued for $4,000. but feels highly salts
fed with the award of the jury.
In the suit of the United Security
company against C. F. Barrowcliffe
court allowed the defendant to pay into
court the sum of s937.4O in full pay
ment of the costs and claim of the
plaintiff. A verdict in the suit of the
American Desk and Seat company
against Farnham & Edgett was taken
in the sum of $l79.S5 for the plaintiff.
Verdict for and Against Defendant.
Judge Edwards presided in No.
court room IN the replevin suit of f. c.
Kicker & Co. against f. s. Warren.
for the plaintiffs, and Attorney o. Il.
Partridge for the defendant. The
amount involved in the suit was $6S.
The plaintiffs owned some horses which
had been kept at the defendants stable
and which were detained by the latter
for the cost Of their keeping. The jury
found verdict Of S. for the defendant
and ordered him to turn over the horses
to the plaintiff.
In No. court room the trespass suit
Of Thomas Conniff against the city Of
Scranton was called for trial before
Judge Mayer and had not proceeded be-
yond the empaneling of a jury when
court adjourned. In No. court the
suit of Carson & Davis against ]. B.
Shiffer went to the jury at 3 o'clock
Another case was opened before Judge
Edwards In No. 2 court, that Of the
Cincinnati Safe and Lock company
against NJ. M. Dewitt. Attorney c. C.
Donovan represents the plaintiff, and
K. A. Zimmerman the defendant.