Year: 1868

Tho Alleged Libel Of Mrs. Mary Anna Dean


Verdict for the Defendant.


At the opening Of the City Court yesterday morning
the action for libel brought by Mrs. Mary Anna
Dean against Mr.. Moses g. Beach, Of the New York
Sxa, was again called on.


On calling over the names Of the jury 1t was dis
covered that one Of the jurymen was absent After
waiting half an heur the counsel On both sides con-
sened to proceed with the case before eleven jurors


Judge Reynolds proceeded 70 sum up the case for
the defence, saying that while the action appeared
to bo somewhat frivolous one and one which should
never have been brought yet 1t had been presented
TO the Jury In such inammatory appeaIsn behalf Of
the plaintiff that 1t became them to try the case care
fully He was OF the opinion that they would be able
to satisfy the jury that the defendant had acted In good
faith through the whole proceedings and that he was
In no way responsible for the publication Of tho art
Gle. There was nothing that called for the punish
ment Of the defendent and, therefore, the question
would resolve itself into what amount Of damage
man uttered slander against another, and did 1t
wiiiuliy was wrong, and the court allowed them
it was quite dinerent. He en- neither aid this
wilfully or maciously. II was usual when lib el.
Gus article appeared to ask the publisher to make
reparation OF the offence The retraction went into
tne same paper IN which the article complained Of
the same families and ali the reparaton that could
be made was made by the defendant This article
mad appeared without the knowledge Of the defend
ant, and therefore he could have had no malice in


The counsel at this point read tho article alluded
70 oy tne counsel 1s.s for ns plaintiff which appeared IN
ton made by the defendant by the publication Of
contradiction. The article which appeared in the
Sun, was also read az wer as the letters Of corec-
tion which were written BY different parties and
Oy s,s the The were
Dean, and presented herself to this charitable insti
tuition In Washington for aid.


that he was quite content to leave the caseYn the
hands Of an intelligent jury.


Ex-Governor Lowe addressed tho jury about two
plaintin. He closed BY saying that he would
not have been compelled to say what he
present during the trial, for her appearance before
them would have been sufilcient appeal to their
hearts He had never seen her but once, and that
was when she called at his ofhce. He expected to
see different kind Of woman; from what no had
heard he expected 70 sss fast giddy gir but she
courage to marry her fathers coachman showing
herself to be true woman. Some women married for
wealth for place and high position; but there was no
and loves him better now than she did when he first
married her Others might be sorry for her, but she
defendant was responsible for the publication OF the
article. They had dragged the plantln through the
streets as q drunken vagrant and had her to Black



man. These men should be taught that they could
not slander respectable citizen with impunty.
S asked S charge S
Jury upon number Of points which he submitted,


Judge Thompson then delivered brief CHARGE
oughy BY the counsel on either side that he should
sniy instruct the Jury upon the law relating to
uts:-"A malicious publication " expressed either
w'G " nGrs Or y sn, o. S eaa or % Se
lie hatred, contempt and ridicule." The definition
was applicable to this case-H It should reach that
y the i Of the this
pressed In printing tending to injure the reputation
OF one living and expose her to public hatred and
Of the article and the accompanying circum-
stances under which It was published. The
highest degree Of malice IN oslous publication a,
whenever he knew Il to Be false at the time Of its
publication and designed the expressions to injure
gTsvation Of the libel Amounts given BY the vsf-
dict Of jury In the punishment OF libel might be
Tse amount q the Verdict nsSs vary be-
or should give . verdict without any refer:
by the proof founded upon the evidences but after
all 1t rested with the common OF the jury x
but upon the testimony presented to them, and with
the exercise Of their common sense applicable to
It: The circumstances which tended to mitigation





safs e: s @sA; ss
WSo had up this
and he could scarcely do better than to refer the
jury In the main to their arguments sometimes,
possibly, 0verstated-and call attention pointedly to
the facts on the side the other which tended
to agravate or to decrease the malice II there were
any in this publication. He could scarcely cali their
attention other facts without review or the tes
tmony, and he would only state on the one side that
II the information published were derived from
NfnH and hat vynn In
the line Of his business as manager Of
public press to produce 1t, these,
for the jury to consider in estimating the amount Of
malice. On the other side circumstances were be
considered as affecting residence and circumstances
but the former knowledge OF the plaintin by the
defendant, so far as any was shown, and
ee'ne1 nas or Of not oe there neglect ere On
In not nquiring TO these facts before publication.


At the request OF the counsel for the defence the
mtted, tie principal Of which were as follows
That the defendant cannot be held responsible for
amy N to s Ssnea 6y e pS
The Judge stated that the defendant could not Of
course, be held responsible for anything which ap-


The counsel asked the Judge to charge that II the
defendant acted as q careful and prudent person
should act in the usual course Of business the verdict
should be In favor OF the defendant.


had acted In such manner the verdict should be
aDsOuVciy ~ Hib ihVOr. ING jury C1HuOt htttiDuI0
express malice to principal for an act committed
BY an agent without his knowledge or authority, and


violation by an agent OF his Instructions or his gen.
eral charge TO conduct . business properly and
legally while 1t may render the principal technically
liable for damages does not warrant the reference
Of express malice. The Judge so charged.


John Dean cannot be considered In this suit; he b
not the plaintiff. II he has been injured he can and
may bring an action to procure reparatton OF that
injury II would be q violation OF law for the jury
TO include In their verdict one cent compensation
or Indemnity to John Dean In this suit for anything
be the subject for another action.


The Judge so charged the jury, when they retired
to consider their verdict.


They came into court at six O'Clock. and returned
verdict In favor of the defendant


COURT cAlENDAA-THH 0M