Year: 1878




It is hard in France to escape historic
ground, so thickly. strewn with stirring
events is her history. A great .fste given by
the President of the French Republic to
celebrate the awarding of the Exposi-
ton prizes must be held in one or
other of the great palaces or public build
ings Of Paris or the neighborhood, and
where could the multitude gather in these
without recalling some mighty pageantry
of the past? But in the Hall Of Mir
rors of the palace at Versailles great gath
ering in the name OF France brings back SO
many brilliant memories that it would be
hard TO choose among them were it not for
the prominence Of one in the near past.
In this great chamber, which last night was
brilliant as light and color and brave and
fair, titled and honored humanity
could make it, and where France, once
more mighty and prosperous. celebrated
her triumph of peace, another scene was
enacted seven years and nine months ago.
There, ON the 18th of January. 1871. in the
hall of the kings of France, Prussian King,
whose guns were even then raining shot
and shell on beleaguered, starving Paris,
stood among German princes, German
soldiers and German statesmen, and was
proclaimed Emperor of Germany. France,
bound and bleeding, with England deaf,
Russia deaf, all the world deaf to her
cries, saw the sceptre of Charlie
magne grasped by the king whose forces
she had Knocked but six months before;
for Kaiser Wilhelm was then master of
France as well as ruler Of Germany. There
was triumph of war. In the resplendence
of Versailles last night, as our dispatches
describe it, surely France can find comfort
from CALLING contemplation Of the pro-
claiming of Kaiser in that same Galerie
des Glaces. England, Spain, Sweden, Den
mark, all the the world now smiles on the
land of the Gaul, as the names of the
foreign guests bear guarantee. France was
not so unfortunate in having the Emperor
who was crowned there wear his heavy
burden of State outside her borders


Libel suits against Newspapers.


case tried few days since before Judge
Van Brunt has received less attention than
it deserves. 1t was suit brought against
the Evening Post by a justice of the peace
for alleged injury done to his character by
the publication of an Associated Press re-
port, which gave his name as that of one of
several criminals that had been arraigned
before him. This was SO obviously a
blunder resulting from mere carelessness
that no acquaintance of the complainant
could have been misled by it. The Post
published prompt and conspicuous
correction of the error, and had the plain
tiff been q reasonable man the subject
would have been dropped as soon as JUS
tice was done him by the correction. But
by the instigation OF some bad adviser, he
was foolish enough to bring suit for libel.
In view of the result, his folly cannot be
much regretted. 1t has led to a judicial
exposition Of the law of libel, which ought
to clear away the ignorance in which this
subject is enveloped in the popular mind
The substance of Judge Van Brunt's deci-
sion is that where there is no malice in the
publication and no actual injury the
plaintiff Is only entitled to nominal
damages. In the case described Judge
Van Brunt directed the jury to find ver-
dict for the plaintiff and to award him six
cents. This decision should have con-
siderable influence in preventing frivolous
libel suits against newspapers. It's prin-
cple is that if there be no malice there is
no ground for what are called exemplary
damages, or damages in the nature of q
penalty, and that the actual injury done to
the complainant is the proper measure of
other damages. The award of six cents is SO
notifying q result of q libel suit that litig-
ious persons will not be encouraged to
bring frivolous suits when they come to
understand the true state of the Law.