Thursday, 25th May, 1902, Before Mr. F. S. A. Bourse, Acting Chief-Justice and a Jary.
H. F. Piven v. R. A. Covseys.
(for the ex-Proprietors of the " Peking and Yientsin Times.")
The Jury consisted of Messrs. Algie, Fisher, Henderson, Mackay and New comb.' The plaintiff was represented by Mr. P. H. Kent while Mr. Mounsey was for the defendant.
The case arose in an alleged libel said to have been committed by the defendant on 13th July, 1901, in publishing the following: "Four Americans and a Britisher are now in the hands of their respective authorities for ' offences against the people of the country, and we hope they will be severely dealt with."
The defendant admitted error and paid fifty dollar cents into Court, claiming that such sum adequately represented" the damage sustained by the plaintiff.
After hearing the evidence, and speeches by the counsel on either side, His Lordship briefly summed up. The gist of the matter was, had the defendant injured the plaintiff by publishing the particulars? If ho has so injured him, then the jury has to decide the extent of the injury. The defendant had mitted error, and by paying into Court the sum of fifty cents had pleaded that the plaintiff had sustained no particular damage. Ho would now state the law.
Englishman might write anything he pleased provided a jury found him blameless. If after weighing the evidence, they found the plaintiff now poorer than he was in reputation, in consequence of the word complained of they would find for him and. assess the damages. The plaintiff had been acquitted at his trial: he says ho suffered damage by the paragraph: the Jury must decide if this is the case. Plaintiff cor-tainly showed apathy about the libel and {also about the apology, and this apathy was somewhat curious. Mr. sent had made a good deal of the question of malice: they had to weigh the consideration whether the paragraph was actually in fact malicious or grossly negligent. They must consider the words complained of and the them to decide if the apology: sufficient or not. He had stretched a point in allowing the plaintiff to be examined as to character, as he had felt the difficulty of the fact that the plaintiff's own Counsel had not put him in the box. The jury had con his demeanour under examination. Although the lence wee somewhat deficient. be thought ihere was eric to enable the Jury to arrive at a decision without much difficulty. Let them quit their minds of all preconceived notions and weigh the evidence: if the plaintiff had suffered damage by the defendant's words they must give him their verdict and assess the damages; but atived ab © contrary conclusion that if, regarding all the evidence they no appreciable damage had been sustained then they must find for the defendant.
The Jury, after an absence of seven minutes, found that a libel had been committed, but that 50 cents was sufficient to cover the damages. His Lordship said that was a verdict for the defendant. Mr. Mounsey asked for costs. Judgment: was given for the defendant with costs,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.