The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-09-08
Ccontinued from Page Four)

| use or that WorQ.
 Testimony has been introduced to | support the claim that the Tribune Company was acting from ulterior motives on account of some interest which distant relatives had in prop l erty in Mexico, and that the Tribune | Company was Intentionally playing ] Germany's game.
 do not think. gentlemen. there is any proof in the case which would warrant the jury in finding either one of these propositions to be true, and you will therefore not consider them. Good Faith Not Sufficient. You will bear in mind that the de- 1 fendant is not required to prove good faith to make good the defense. The ] only effect of proving good faith Is to | lessen or diminish the damages to ! such extent you may determine to i be proper if you do not find the de- 1 fense Of justification or fair com | ment to have been sustained That is if the defense does not sustain the | burden placed on them on either of | those propositions, as to the truth of l the editorial, or as to its having been 1 fair comment, you may then Inquire ] whether they were animated by act ual malice, or good faith, or not, and if you find 1t was done in good faith, l even though HbeIous, you may reduce i the damages to such amount as you | In your good judgment consider they 1 ought to be reduced, on account of the fact, if you find 1t to be a fact that the defendant acted in good faith.
 have told you that one party or the other must prove certain matters | by a preponderance, of the evidence
 and I have said I would particularly define and describe that term for you. | Wherever the burden of proof as to 1 any issue is upon one party, that party must sustain that issue by a l preponderance of the evidence. The term ''preponderance of the evidence" means the quality of outweighing in | convincing power. It means prepond- | erance in the convincing power of the | evIdence-such evidence as, when | weighed with that which is offered against it or to oppose 1t, has more | convincing power in the minds of the | jury-the more convincing indications 1 as to where the truth lies It is not a technical term at all, but means 1 simply that evidence which outweighs
 that which is offered to oppose 1t. It ! does not necessarily mean that greater number of witnesses shall be l produced on the one side or the other.
 It might occur that the statement or
 superior knowledge of the subject
 matter testified to, of one or a few
 witnesses, might be of more import
 ance and be relied upon with a great 1 CT degree of assurance than that of a
 greater number and that the testi
 mony of some witnesses was strength l ened or weakened by other facts or ! .s.5-
 dence. But it means that upon the 1 whole eveidence the jury believe the | greater probability of the truth to be
 upon the side of the party having
 the affirmative of the issue. You will l observe that the evidence need not be
 such as produces in your minds an | absolute belief or an abiding con- | viction, as in a criminal case, for in
 stance. Nor need the proof be clear ! or satisfa ctory. It is sufficient if in
 your minds you come to believe the
 greater probability of the truth to be
 upon one side of the issue rather than
 upon the other.
 Must Be True or Fair Comment.
 The editorial upon which this suit
 is brought was voluntarily and inten-
 tionally written and published, and,
 therefore, if you do not find that it !
 the sense in which you may find it to
 have been reasonably understood.
 plaintiff is entitled to such damages l as will compensate for such injury as you may md must inevitably to have | resulted.
 There Is no rule which I can give
 you for the estima ton of the amount
 of damage which will result or would l result by reason of the publication of | any given editorial or libel to either
 a persons feelings or reputation
 You will simply have to use your own
 good, common, hard headed senses,
 being reasonable and fair to both l parties.
 No special damages have been proven in this action and therefore if , l you should come to consider the ques- ton of damages. the recovery can be only for general damages. General | damages are those which the law will | presume to be the natural or prob | able consequence of the particular
 publication complained of. They arise ! by inference of law and need not be proved by the evidence. They may 7 be found by you to be nominal dam
 ages only, or you may find them in such amount beyond nominal dam
 ages as will compensate plaintiff for | such injury 10 IepuIdllph anu
 feelings as you find to have been
 sustained. but nothing more than
 compensation can be awarded. taking
 into account all that I have said | about reputation and so on, that
 will fairly compensate the plain
 tiff for the damage that you conceive
 him to have fairly suffered by reason
 of the publication of that editorial,
 both as to his feelings and his repu-
 tation; not fancifuI damages. but just
 plain, just damages-that is. if you
 come to the question of damages.
 You must take into consideration ! 1 the entire case as shown before you relating to the matter and determine N from your good judgment as to the I general damages what would recom- ! pense the plaintiff for the natural I consequences of the particular publi- cation complained of, the editorial of i June 23, 1916, under the circum-
 stances. That is the way you are to get at it; not fanciful damages, nor wild damages, nor speculative dam
 ages, nor damages by way of revenge