The Newark star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1909, 1909-11-19
PATERSON PAPER
WINS LIBEL SUIT
IN APPEAL COURT
Verdict for ST ,350ior City Coun-
sci Mercy Against Guar
dian Set Aside.

TRENTON, Nov. 1y.-Justice Eoor-
hees has hled in the Supreme Court
an opinion which reverses q judgment
obtained by City Counsel Edward F.
Mercy, of Paterson, against the Pater-
son Guardian for $1,3ou tor libel. The
reversal is on the ground that the triai
Judge erred in his charge TO the Jury
Dy excluding certain evidence. Tne
damage suit resulted from the pubiica-
uon by the Guardian or a story involv-
ing City Counsel Mercy for failure to
prosecute violations of the excise law
in Paterson. Before the suit was
started Mr.. Mercy demanded a retrac-
ton, which the Guardian refused to
make on the ground that Its publica-
ton was truthful.
The point upon which the case turned
in the Supreme Court vas whether the
communication as printed in the
Guardian was on a privileged occasion
and constituted fair m pom the
acts of public officials. This phase OF
the case was held from the jury and
the Supreme Court ruled that it should
have gone to the jury.
Under the caption "As Others See
US, the Guardian published some COM
ment upon Paterson officials to which
Mr.. Mercy took exception, and de-
manded a ~retraction which the news
paper declined TO make, pleading as a
reason therefor the truth Of it's asser-
ton. The portions of the article tc
which Mr.. Mercy particularly dis
scented were found in the following
paragraphs:
In view of the recent efforts made
- NTo-.x- nHoDrtda on1 nthar aifizanE
to regain some of the prestige which
Paterson has lost, it Is not pleasant
| to admit the justice of the criticisms
made In State papers on the actions
of the aldermen and city counsel in
making it impossible to ppnishe viola
tons of the excise laws.
1.-THE recent action of the Board of
Aldermen and city counsel has brought
forth caustio comment that does this
! city ~incalculable harm, because it Is
true. The following extract from w
of the leading papers of the State will
prove to show how Paterson's reputa-
ton is being blasted by the acts of its
own officials"
Justice voorhees, in his opinion sus-
tanned the action of the trial judge in
refusing a motion for a non-suit and
| to direct a verdict for the Guardian
He said that it was manifest at the
| close of the defendants case there had
not developed a condition which the
court could deai with as a matter OF
pure law, hence the motions were prop
erly refused.
The court, at the end of the charge,
at the request of Mr.. Mercy, instructed
the jury that as no justification can
be made under the pleas filed in the
lease of tina part of the public article
lof May 9. 1908, which the defendants
admitted publishing in relation to the
PLAINTIFFS official position being used
to protect law breakers. the plaintiff
was entitled to a verdict. On this
phase of the case Justice voorhees,
says:
'It is true that the second plea is
not a plea of truth and justification as
to the whole article. A reading of the
! articles will disclose the fact that GER
tain accusation were made against the
city counsel as such, and certain
others are made against the city Off
cials The latter, by innuendo, have
been made by the plaintiff to refer to
himself; the former needs no innuendo.
All the accusations of the former class
the defendants have by their pleas
justified as true. The remaining class
they defend under their plea of gen.
eral issue and other pleas.
'The charges which were attempted
to be justified are in substance that
the actions of the city counsel make
it impossible to punish violations of
the excise laws, and that the actions of
the city counsel nave brought forth
oaustic comment, which does the city
harm because it is true, and that the
extracts from two leading papers serve
to show how the city's reputation is
being blasted. The remaining charges,
not justified, are that the men sworn
to uphold the law used the power of
office to protect law-breakers and make
it impossible to punish open violations
of the law, and that hurts Paterson
more than anarchy, because 1t cannot
be truthfully contradicted.
.'These W sets of accusations are
quite separate. One is confined to the
CITY counsel and is concerned with the
violation of excise laws. The. other
refers TO, the city officials in protecting
law-breakers in general In open viola
lions of the law. The truthfulness OF
a libel is a complete defense in a civil
action, but it must be pleaded fully and
as to every particular, and be strictly
proved to be awaited of.
But the rule that in actions Of libel
the justification pleaded must be as
broad as the charge is not to be con-
strued to mean that 1t must embrace
every libelous charge contained in the
declaration When the charges made
are separate and distinct the Defend
ants may justify as to some and plead
| otherwise as to others. Whether the
defendant has succeeded in establishing
the pleas of justification as to those
charges to which these pleas were in
terposed and confined was for the jury.
The plaintiffs own testimony recited
facts and circumstances in connection
with the -postponement and dismissal
Of the excise cases and regarding his
own conduct from which a jury might
-