The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-11-17
A LIBEL VERDICT
Judgment for $500 Against
a Local Newspaper.
Harry Saylor's Complaint-Trlal Ey
Perry and Stanley.

In the Circuit Court, First Circuit.
before Antonio Perry. presiding judge.
Harry Saylor VS.. The Hawaiian Star
Newspaper Association. Limited. case
for libel, continued from May term,
was brought up and concluded ysster-
day. The following jurors were
sworn: Jas. b. German. Seely !. Shaw.
p. MuhleEdorf. f. E. Miller, Jas. l..
Mclean, Geo. Angus. w o. Atwater.
A c. Davis. J. W. Robertson, G.. \.
Schumann, c. r. Collins and ID. w
McNicoll. c. Creighton and w. y.
Henshall for plaintiff; Kinney & Bal
lou and McClanahan for defendant
The paragraph complained of appeared
in the Hawaiian Star of Monday, April
4, 1898, under court notes and reads
as follows:
Harry Saylor. a haole, is in jail,
charged with stealing wooden Gala
bash. His case will come up this
week"
The same paper, on April 8, contain
ed a correction as follows: Among
the court notes which appeared in The
Star on last Monday, an item stated
chat Harry Saylor was in Jail, charged
with stealing a calabash. This was a
mistake. The facts are these: Mr.. Say
Tor was served with a penal summons
to answer to the charge of embeZzle-
ment; when the case was called yes
terday, it was dismissed by the pro-
secution."
The morning was passed in taking
evidence. After recess Mr.. Kinney
reads deposition OF Robt. w. Shingle,
who was employed as City Editor for
the Star at the time of the appearance
of the alleged libel and who secured
the item and caused it to be published.
From this voluminous document it APP
pears that Shingle did not know plain
tiff except by name: that although he
afterwards identified him as the man
he had seen behind the bar of the Ha
waiian Hotel, he did not have any rea-
son to believe that this was the in
diVidual referred to in the news item;
that they had never conversed together
in their lives, and that as matter of
fact he (Shingle) had no reason for
any animuS or feeling against the
plaintiff in any way.
After the examination of few more
witnesses Mr.. Kinney, at 2:40 p. m. ad-
dresses the jury, followed by Mr..
Creighton at 1855 p. m, and at 800
the Court briefly charges the jury, who
then retire Mr.. Creighton notes an
exception to certain portions of the
Courts charge and to the refusal of
the Court to give the instructions as
asked for by the plaintiff, which eX-
ception is allowed by the Court. The
jury returns after twenty minutes
celebration with verdict for plaintiff
with damages in the sum of Five Hun
dred Dollars; two dissenting. w. ..
Atwater, foreman. Mr.. Kinney notes
an exception to the verdict as being
contrary to the law and the evidence
and to the weight of the evidence and
gives notice OF q molten for new
trial.
Before Judge Stanley, the case of J.
\. MagoOn VS.. Louis Marks, aSsumpslt,
trial by jury, was commenced and con-
tinued till this morning.
Henry Vida VS.. James Carly, tres
pass, is continued till next term.
Chas. F. Chillingsworth. Deputy Mar
shall, has returned unsatisfied, writ OF
execution in the matter of Paul Neu-
mann VS.. Victoriano Ohera, for SS19.75.
amount of judgment, with interest and
cost, entered in said action on the 25th
day of April. 1898. no bond of indem-
nifty having been fled.
In the matter of A. J. FerTeira VS..
Manuel Faria, continued from yester-
day. a verdict was rendered for the
l0c, 1Nx- s-iflF acr
A G.. Correa for plaintiff; Geo. y.
Davis for defendant. This was the
jury: d. T. Bailey. B. r. Campbell,
w. o. Atwater, NJ. Phillips, T. S. Dou-
glass, F. ]. Kruger. F. H. Foster. Jas.
McInerny, A. b. Wood, w. w. Harris.
and Geo. McNicoll. Notice Of motion
for new trial was given by plaintiff.