The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-01-19
YODER'S PRINTER
ORDERED TO PAY
Supreme Court Upholds Saun-
ders Verdict Against Will
liams Company.
LAW OF LIBEL MADE CLEAR
Judge Keith Explains Point ON
Which Public Officer Is
Awarded Damages.
LAW OF LIBEL MADE CLEAR

In an extended opinion handed down
yesterday by the Supreme Court OF
Appeals the law of libel in Virginia Is
clearly defined. the verdict OF tho Law
and Equity Court OF damages in the
sum of $1,000 In the suit of Clyde w
saunders against Rufus Z. Williams ana
iiams Printing Company. and Adon a.
foder being affirmed. Judge Keith
who wrote tho opinion. discusses at
some length tho instructions OF the
trial court bearing on privileged pub
locations. Soder was the author and
the Williams firm the printer and pub
Usher OF pamphlet or publication
which in cortain specific issues sharply
criticized Clyde w. Saunders, then n
candidate Tor recollection TO the City
Democratic Committee at an approsoh-
claimed that the publication came with
IN tho scope OF privileged matter, but
tho lower court did not take that view,
and Its decision Is now upheld
AS TO exceptions noted by the de-
tendants to the admission into the evil.
dence OF certain articles published In
the same pamphlet in Issues prior 10
and subsequent to the specific pubnca-
tipn which was made tho basis of the
suit. the opinion holds this as proper
10 prove the general scope and chavac-
ter of the publication--that articles of
a similar character referring to others
than Mr.. Saunders could properly be
introduced to show that the publication
was reckless and indifferent TO the
malice"
The moro the evidence approaches
PROOF OF Systematic practice OF libel
ing or slandering the pla!niin. the more
Keith. holding that the instructions of
Judge Ingram to tho trial Jury as to
tho nature and weight of this testimony
was proper.
The plea OF Privilege
As. to the plea OF privilege. Judge
Keith says:
since all power is vested In and con-
seQuerty derived from the people. and
magistrates are their trustees and ser
wants and at all times amenabe to
them, I, follows as n necessary consc-
quenCc that the people have right
TO he informed OF the conduct and char
case of an indictment or informal don
for a libel against public officers or
candidates for office the truth ia a
Justification"
that Williams and Yoder did not at
tempt to prove the truth OF the sta.e-
mcnt sued upon, but merely alleged
that at the time OF it's writing and
and hence published II without malice
Publication of tho truth regarding
the character of public officer" says
the opinion. "and relating to his quail
iications for such office, made with
intent TO inform tho people. are Sot
libclous. hut the publication Of false
MOOD ana caiumnY against public Off
GERS and candidates Tor public office
is very high offense. IT Is one thing
to comment upon or criticize. even with
severity. the acknowledged or proved
acts OF a public man. and quite another
to assert that he has been guilty OF
particular acts of misconduct.
The press has no exclusive privilege.
II does not matter by whom the report
Is published. The privilege Is the same
for an individual as for a newspaper"
The judgment OF the lower court in
allowing damages In the sum of 900
is affirmed.