Since no special' damage has been pleaded or proved by plainti, his ase must fall unless' the publication complained of is libelous per se, After a careful study of the language the Court concludes it is not libellous. per se, It does not defame the plaint-it's character. integrity, or morals, nor does it ridicule him as a private person but only in his public capacity of sports writer. Tt does not deal with him as an individual beyond his relation to his work, Under the law applicable to criticism of authors in. both the United States and England, the Court be-Tieves defendant's publication is. not actionable, See Carr v, Hood, Campbell's Report, 355; "Walker june Company, 29 Fed. 827; Prose Company v, Stewart, 14 AN, 51 Newell on "Slander and Libel" (4th Ed.) Sec. 478 of seq, Sec. 496, Sec. 498 ct seq. The courts have been Somewhat cynical about entertaining bel actions by one newspaper man. against another in a ease of news: ligney v. Van Ben-18: Newell See. 429, The complaint will be dismissed.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.