New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-04-18
ENGLISH LIBEL LAW.
AN ACTRESSES REDRESS FOR SOCIAL TAT
TLE-A DISASTROUS EXPERIMENT IN
PEDANTIC PURIsM-MR. WHISTLER
AS A WITNESS.

strange anomalies IN theory and pracuc'' ou'
in one respect II is satisfactory IN opera''o'i
Its processes are rapid, and truth Is
while the libel is still fresh in memory ~
81. James's Budget" published on FEBRUARY 10
an untruthful statement respecting MISS NO
Terry the accomplished actress, who IS ho"
playine at the Criterion Theatre In Inc ny
clan" An apology. with what was meant ~ -
an adeouate expression of regret, appeareu ia
the following issue Of that periodicai' pu' NV
actresses lust resentment was not appe"'eN
She instructed her solicitor 10 orhs sun O
libel and she won her case yesterday AZ '''
Queens Bench Division, about seven "ee"' -,
ter the original publication ms was
work and fair illustration or the pm 49,.
win which legal issues are settled in the Eng
lsh courts. o.
The libel for which damages were asked was
49, sta.erosn+ that that clever and delightful
actress. Miss Marion Terry. seen on INC oo"'N'
oil roo seldom, Of late will soon desert her pro-
fassion altoeether for II is now an open secret
.ha, &c soon AS their term OF mourning sn''i'
have passed Miss Terry is TO be married 10 "ei
brother-,n-law. Mr. Morris" The ASSERTION was
absolutely without foundation. MISS Terry ii".
no irr.ention OF retiring from the stays H'
marrying her brother-in-law, Who' %! 'ho 49,
death of her sister had been left widow'f VIII
four Young children. The terms IN "h'o" '"'
-.-,o,rcsrent was made precluded the assump-
.,,r op malicious motive. II was bit OF soc'ai
,oer,, in which there was not an atom or truth
There were no witnesses for the oefe''ce' ."o
cm,nsel contenting themselves VITA repeaui!s
their clients expression Of regret IN ~ any pam
mr. ANNOYANCE had been caused by paraet"p"
which had been printed In gooo raith' ou' un'
fortunately without foundation IN lacI iN'
.ury were not Influenced by this cohciiia'otS
conduct. They promptly found Vero'o' io' 'N0
sctreas for $500 damages
The question Of marriage with q deceaseo
L.. s,.ter was not raised. What was oOn-
s,dered. actionable was tho statement that 'ne
Id, ,,r.endea 70 marry when she had no such
,,,sr4,or This was tn. libel and the case was
,,,,cue Probably there vas never before a iloei
c.sa IN the English courts in which woman
.ued her slnnderer for proclaiming to the wor'o
her intention o. marrying when she hao ho
thought Of doing So The handsome actress
whose interest In four motherless children hao
beer extensively msinterpreted. took the matt
seriously and the jury justified her COURSE nv
journal. which had been misied by the sos''p
purveyor providing the false bit or tlt'ie-'a.I'
|ro,, stage or restaurant. was held Responsible
Gov the damages caused by the ANNOUNCEMENTS OF
her retirement from the profession
" WAS a lust Judgment too, for the libel IN
.,o,vea a wanton invasion Of privacy, TO WHICH
nm actress was peculiarly sensitive from sheer
excess Of publicity Of her stage lire Because
oo,resees are constantly before the footlights
.ha,r nrivata lives are accounted public prop
ertv. and they are exposed TO every breath VI
,,,lgar chatter Mr.. Justice Grantham properly
,a-rad. when the conductors OF what are
called smart papers insert smart paragraphs
-or rho amusement OF smart people. and possibly
g., oraer "a nrouote their own circulation, am
80. s,,rnrsed that the people affected VIII not
ooc.nt an apology at least a left-handed one
,1iss Terry and Mr.. Justice Grammar nave
shown how easy 1t is. at least In Engiaho' u
wake the trade OF the scandal-monger, with us
v,anton invasion Of privacy, expensive anu
hazardous
,,,,,er r,N suit was closed on the same day
,oeora Mr. Justice Mathew, in the Queens Bench
di,,isior with alrros. equal expedition. little
over three months after the publication when
gave rise to It, This was based on dehca'e
no,nt Of art criticism. II was libel SUIT proushl
Inv Nr Joseph Pencil against MI. "alter "ic"-
ert and Mr. Frank Harris. Editor OF the oalur-
dav Review" and turned upon what was well
described as a point Of pedantic purlsm' MI
penneu and Mr.. Sickert were art critics ana
nersonal friends who were censurlng Professor
IJer<orYser rot long for passing on as etches
what we're technically photo-zinc reproducuoiS
IN an illustrated book. Mr. Penneh subsequently
.,,t,;shed a hook Of illustrations Irvings al
hambra." and exhibited the drawings MI SICK
or, tboue4t that he had caught his fellow-purist
..,,,,irev and as an interesting bit Of pedantry.
exnosed him in "The Saturday Review lie was
tripped up himself, Tor MI ieiiiei' '">1 '
libel and won his case.
,ho cosa attracted a large audience OF art crit
a.. ord artists. because Mr. Whistler was Wit
,ess for his friend. Mr.. Pennen and the appear
o,oa ~ that eccentric artist and man OF genius
an any controversy IS always an interesting
.yert He was called as an expert to TESTIFY mat
Illustrations produced as Mr.. PennelIs hao
been by the,transfer Of drawing from paper 10
etone were correctly described as H'hosIapAs'
and were not to be discredited as transfer h'ho-
granhs." Mr.. Sckert had contended mat the
drawing for a true Autograph must De hlaue Oh
49,. s,one and that Mr.. Pennen had beer guilt;
:. H. so,oa lnosaness Of statement Of which he
,od succeeded in convicting Professor Herkomec-
Mr. Whistler asserted with characte Ast'c posi-
,,veness that no distinction could be drawn De-
tween the two processes. either arusticaiiy OF
commercially; that the result in each case was
.be artists own work. and that there was no su-
,er;ority OF one method over the other' On '"l3
point he was sustained py MI O''Dci" ~" 49, 49,
Thompson. Editor OF The Art journal anu
half a dozen other experts
7, Was while under oross-examination that Mr..
whistler afforded the audience Of artists and
Tt. ,ba entertainment which they sought. His
-a,,,as were so dry that they fairly cracked. and
go, sentence WAS received with roar OF laugh
CO.. When asked whether he was very angry
win Mr. sickert for accusing him Of pursuing
.he same evil practices Mr.. Ponnen. he re-
rl,ed with a droll drawl: Distinguished persons
ike ourselves are attacked by an absolutely I'M
known authority" When reminded that Mr..
sickert had described him as genius. ne retort-
cd: ct IS a very simple and proper thing for him
20 saw that sort OF thing" When the quotation