New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-06-14
Division Holds
Plaintiffs Past Is Suffi-
Cient for Defence.
SUIT OVER ARTICLE
IN "AD-VISOR"
Defendants Told of Harris "In.
vasion" Of Fifth Avenue with
"Shoddy" Stock.

decision just handed down by the
Appellate Division Of the Supreme
Court in the case Of Jacob NJ. Harris
VS.. The Tribune Association proved an
interesting development yesterday In
the history Of the libel suits brought
against The Tribune by those who have
thought themselves aggrieved by the
series Of articles on honest and dis
honest advertising from the pen of
Samuel Hopkins Adams that have been
running in these columns since Janu-
airy, 1915.
In his Advisor" column and also
in his Sunday articles Mr.. Adams has
been exposing fake and deceptive trade
methods on the part Of dealers in
Fifth Avenue and other prominent
streets which have led to a consider
able number Of libel suits on the part
Of merchants and other dealers whose
trade methods have been so exposed,
some Of them for egregiously large
sums, even to the quarter or half q
million dollars.
Up to the present time none Of these
actions has been brought to trial, but
by motion and other intermediate pro-
ccedings many attacks have been made
by the counsel for the plaintiffs in such
suits upon the defences Of The Tribune
as pleaded in its answers in such suits,
several of which have gone to the APP
pellate Division for final decision, but
ell OF which have finally been decided
in favor Of The Tribune.
Decision Of Importance
In ell Of these cases The Tribune has
justified, alleging the truth Of all the
defamatory charges made in the pub
lished articles, and has also pleaded
privilege" because Of the public SER
vice performed in the correction Of n
great public evil. The decision Of the
Appellate Division rendered in the
Harris case is Of especial Importance,
because il establishes the right of The
Tribune Association to defend upon the
ground of the past fraudulent trade
record Of the plaintiff in substantial
ton of the charges in the Adams ar
ticles sued upon, as well as proving his
similar acts in his Fifth Avenue shop.
Harris brought his libel suit upon the
first part of an article by Mr.. Adams,
published in The Tribune in February,
1915, in which it was charged that Har-
ris Invaded" Fifth Avenue with illegit-
innate and shoddy trade methods and
continued as dealer in rugs, fur
niture, fakes, frauds and swindles in a
large and commodious pitfall between
Twenty and Twenty eighth
Streets" He did not include in his
action the principal part Of the article.
which recited instances OF his crooked
methods of trade In his Fifth Avenue
shop that had been unearthed by The
Tribune's Bureau Of Investigation.
The Tribune pleaded the truth OF all
of this, including the statement that
prior to the plaintiffs invasion" of
Fifth Avenue he had engaged in "ille-
Ultimate" trade practices and had con-
Quoted "shoddy trade" In substantial
ton of this, defendants answer set out
particulars of Harris's past varied
business career" including his many
partnerships and other business asso-
Citations and two bankruptcies, in which
little or nothing was paid 10 his cred
itors. II was also alleged that there
were many facts and circumstances in
said bankruptcy proceedings which were
discreditable 10 plaintiff"
Counsel for The Tribune procured an
order for the examination Of Harris as a