Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1899-04-20

va
or to publish the natural defects,
of one who is living and thereby
expose him to public hatred, con-
tempt and ridicule."
2. l have thus stated from the
very words of the statute what
kind OF a publication is libel in
this jurisdiction, and it is for you,
gentlemen of the jury, to say
whether the publication set forth
in the plaintiffs complaint, and
which | have read in your hear
ing, falls within that definition,
and as incidentally TO that, wheth-
er it is calculated to lnjure the
reputation of the plaintiff.
5. You will see from the defni-
tion of libel which | have given
you that it is a malicious detama-
tion. Malice in uttering false
statements may consist either in a
direct intention to injure another,
or in a reckless disregard OF his
rights and the consequences which
may result to him. Implied NAL
ice is inferred from the falsity
of the charge, or where
the words are actionable OF
themselves. 1t is not necessary
to prove express malice. Malice
in this connection signifies the
absence of just cause or excuse,
and where there is no just cause
or excuse for the publication the
person who makes the publication
is responsible for the natural con-
sequences of his act. 1t is rule
that the right to damages follows
consequentially the publication OF
words actionable in themselves
because the inevitable tendency
OF such words as to injure the per-
son of whom they are spoken.
To constitute malice it is not
necessary to show by. direct proof
an intention to iDjure the plaintiff.
If you should find from the evil
dence that the publication set
forth in the complaint in this ac-
! ton is a libel upon the character
of the plaintiff, and If you should
determine that it is calculated
to injure the reputation OF the
plaintiff, it will be your duty to
assess his damage at such sum as
you may find from all evidence IN
| the case, he is entitled to recover
not exceeding the sum of 81 900,
the amount claimed in the COM
plant.
4. As hearing upon the PLAIN
tiff7s right to recover damages IN
this case, you will take into con-
sideration the previous reputation
of the plaintiff, and his conduct
toward his family, and his assocla-
tions, and the character OF the
people he associated with, and the
standing of the plaintiff in the
community in which he had lived.
If YOU find from the evidence in
this case that the plaintiff himself
aided in the circulation OF the
publication in question, and that
by reason of the plaintiffs conduct
the publication was cOmmuincat-
ed } third persons, then the plain
til. cannot recover damages for in
iuries to his reputation in the es-
timation of such third persons as
may have derived their informa-
ton solely from him.
5. If you believe from the evil
dence in this case that the occur
renee mentioned in the publication
in question actually took place,
but that the person named Smith
engaged in it was not the plaintiff
in this case, and that upon discoy-
ering this fact the defendants cor
rected the error, you will take this
fact into consideration in mitiga-
tion of damages in this case.
6. In order to entitle the plain
tiff TO recover in this case you must
believe from the evidence that his
reputation has beeninjured by the
publication, and you must also be-
lieve from the evidence that the
publication was false and malici-
Gus, and that the publication must
have tended to impeach the repu-
tation or virtue of the plaintiff, or
must have tended to charge him of
having been guilty of crime. The
iury are to determine whether the
publication in question constitutes
libel upon the character of the
plaintiff, and they are to determ-
Inc the amount Of damages, if any,
the plaintiff is entitled to recover.
If you believe from the evidence
that the defendants, when they
published the article in question,
were not actuated by malice or i'll
will towards the plaintiff, and that
they believed the substance of the
charge to be true, or if you believe
from the evidence that the publi-
cation complained of was inserted
in said paper without i'll will or
malice towards the plaintiff, and
merely as an item of news, and not
for the purpose of injuring the
Repatriation of the plaintiff, then
the plaintiff in this case cannot re-
cover damages for the purpose of
Furnishing the defendants, but he
will be confined to the recovery OF