The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-02-09
Judge ingram gave the following in

Judge Ingram gave the following in
structions to the jury in the Saunders
Yoder damage suit:
The court instructs the jury that
proprietors and printers OF perlodlcals'
such as the Idea, introduced in cyl
dence here, are just as liable for what
they print and publish as any other
person. They are liable in the Same
manner and TO the same extent.
The fact that one is a candidate for
furnishes n legal excuse for fair ana
proper criticism, made in good faith
and without malice, of such of his acts
as are proven by the evidence; but as
respects his personal character, there
is no such enlarged right of criticism,
though he be a candidate for office.
This enlarged right of criticism Is
confined to such of his acts as are
established by the evidence.
The publication of defamatory Ian
guage. such as is set out in the first
and second counts of the declaration
herein. cannot be justified on the
ground that it was published as criti-
cism. The law protects not only the
person and property of the citizen. pNt
vigilantly guards as equally sacred his
personal reputation and character.
Question OF Malice.
A publication in such a periodical.
made either Of public officer or OF
n candidate seeking an office from me
votes of the people, which falsely I'M
putes to him crime or moral deiin-
quency, is not privileged publication,
but from such publication tho law
imputes malice to both the author ana
the printer thereof, and the person
DETAINED is entitled to recover dam
ages for any injury he may suffer
I, thereby to his business, his feelings
and his reputation. unless the lam
guase itself DO satisfactorily explained.
and II hctual malice or a reckless
49, ,jyIt 20 Nf
Is shown the jury may award IN az.
dition thereto punitive or exemplary
damages as hereinafter defined:
The court further instrucis the 1ury
that the publications or charges sel
OF of the q. declaration herein lmpute moral
delinquency to the plaintiff. aud they
are not privileged communications.
iinfers that they We're falsely and ma
| liciouslM made, and throws upon the
| defendants. and each Of them. the bur
/ den Of proving by reliable and credible
| evidence that the allegations were
true, and also that the publications
were made in good faith and without
malice.
The court further instructs the Jury
! that under the pleadings and proof In
| this case there being no plea filed nor
the charges sued on are true. the
jury must consider that said charges
| are untrue, and the said articles not
| being privileged the publication OF
them was an unlawful act on the part
of the defendants, for which they
(, must answer in damages, the amount
! OF which Is to be determined upon
the principles laid down In the other
| instructions given the Jury.
The court further instruots the Jury
that while malice Is tho gtst OF this
Il action, and proof that the defend
i ants We're actuated by malice In max
ing said publications Is necessary .ir
order to recovery against them, YET
Iihis does not mean malice or III VII
towards the plaintiff in the ordinary
meaning Of the term.
Must Hear consequences.
Every man Is intended to mean thu
" natural and probable consequences O
his acts. and is hound to answer TO-
SUCH consequences, and 1t is not nee
Z essary to render the acts complaine