The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-12-17

or sister on the other hand. One OF
tho relatives mentioned may give hon
lest advice or use reasonable pcrsua-
sion with pure motives or express an
honest opinion without mourning re-
sponsibility for the separation al
though the advice or opinion mnv bo
unfortunate. unless II is shown tbnt
the advice or opinion was not given
/ or expressed under the influence OF
natural affection or of the family re
lation. but proceeded from Ill will or
malice.
| II the jury believe from tho cvi-
dcnce that acts and statements or
conduct of one or more OF tho dc
PENDANTS caused or influenced IN.
wife In this case to leave and remain
away from her husband. yet ir they
further believe from the evidence that
such acts. statements and conduct ar
the defendants immediately following
Information received by them Of tho
| marriage OF the plaintiff and his wife
proceeded spontaneously and natural
~ from tho fact that knowledge OF
the Intended marriage on April %
| 1913. was withheld from them and
were honest expressions OF the feel
= ings and opinions Of the defendants
as members OF the family OF the plain
tlr5 wife, under the circumstances
under which. as appears In the evil
dence, they received Information OF
the marriage. and that after the
plaintiffs wife left the city OF Rich
/ mond the defendants did nothing fur
ther to keep up the separation than
to give the wife such opinions. advico
I or assistance as they honestly be-
! livedc were for her best interest or
, welfare. then the defendants would
not be liable.
Hut II the jury believe from IN.
evidence that such acts. statements or
conduct Of the defendants. or anv one
.
, pressicns OF feelings and opinions ~
Inc character above stated, but tina,
such actH. statements or conduct and
any further opinions. advice or az
slstance given or rendered to the p,nir
uifs wife proceeded from a. wilrul
Intention on tho part OF one or more
OF the defcndante. with malice towards
the plaintiff. TO cause the plaintiff.
WHO TO abandon him and remain AVA
from him nnd so ,leprfyn hin, -,
her affection and OF tho comfort MA
solace or her society, and they did
cause the vile 10 abandon and renal,
away from him, then such dcfendan,
or defendants would be liable to tho
PLAINTIFF
Motive Presumed worthy.
S. The jury IL instructed that ~.
family relationship between tho platu
tins wife and each of the defendant.
~ fact that Ia material on the que,
ton OF motive or malice In tho cves
| IN giving advice 10 the wife OF a plain
I'M. does not stand In the same pos;tlon
as an outsider might stand The mo
ives or each OF fuch relatives arc pre-
sumed by the law 20 Lo worthy until
the contrary ~ shown. Bad or un.
worthy motives must not be presumed
Inry must DO shown positively or lo
necessarily deduced from the facts and
circumstances proven by the evidence
The burden OF proving that ,hey ,cer.
iG
plaintn. The extent Of this burden is
TO prove that the advice was actua,ed
~ malice ana of overcoming the pre-
sumption that they each acted ;.odc,.
the influence OF natural affection, ana
Tor what they each believed TO be Tor
the real good OF the plaintiffs wife
The fact that such advice. If IL be a
iac'' was made upon mistaken prem
lses, or upon false Information. or WAS
unfortunate and unwise, Is immaterial
II they honestly believed that the ad
Vice. II any Was given. WAS for her
best interest.
Plnintin Must Prove Malice
= Tho jury Is further instructed that
the pla!niim Is not entitled to . YER
dict merely because the" may believe
from the greater weight OF the evi-
dcnce that the defendants or any one
or moro OF them by counselinE or adj
Ntsing the plaintiffs wife, caused her
TO remain away from him aiicuatcd
her affections. persuaded and induced
her not To live with him but the jury
must believe from the greater weight
OF the evidence that ia counseline
or advising they were actuated only
BY malice or III Will toward the plain
tiff. and We're not moved 10y "a desire
Tor the welfare and happiness or tn.
plaintiffs wife For the liability or
the defendants. or any one OF ,hcm.
does not depend upon whether tho sep
aratiou resulted wholly or in part from
the adric. which any one OF them
may have given, but also upon the mo-
tive with which IL was given.
Each OF the defendants had in law
the right 10 give to her such advice and
10 bring such means of persuasion or
induccnent to bear upon her as thcY
fairly and honestly considered 70 lts
called for by her best interests ana
no ono Of the defendants is liable Tor
her leaving the plaintim in consequence
thereof. unless he or she was actuated
by malice or i'll VIII towards the plain
TIM and not by proper regard for
her welfare and happiness. The bur
den IL upon the plaintiff TO prove not
only the alleged acts, but also OF over
coming the presumption OF law IN their
favor az 10 their motives and also of
clearly proving that they were actuatcd
by i'll VIII or malice.
burden on Pisintin.
TO- The jury arc instructed that
where II is the presumption OF law
that the motive which prompted an
act WAS proper, ana where the burden
is imposed upon the plaintiff 10 show
that the motive which prompted tho
action was improper and malicious,
and the evidence as TO the motive is
reasonably susceptible of two con
structions, the jury must hold that the
motive which prompted the action was
proper.
Acts TO he Proven.
II. IF the jury believe from tho
evidence that no conspiracy is shown.
and each defendant is responsible for
his own acts, the jury are instructed
that before they can return Il verdict
against any one Of the defendants,
they must believe from the evidence
that such defendant did pcrpetrato
upon the plaintiff the wrong alleged
In the declaration by one or more or
the following methods alleged In the