Replication to preceding Plea. And as to the plea of the said Thomas Latimer, by him secondly above pleaded, the said coroner and attorney of our said Lady the Queen, in the court of our said Lady the Queen, before the Queen herself, who prosecuteth for our said Lady the Queen, in this behalf, being present here in court, having here the said plea of the said Thomas Latimer, by him secondly above pleaded in bar, for our said Lady the Queen, saith that for anything by the said Thomas Latimer, in his said second plea alleged, our said Lady the Queen ought not to be barred from prosecuting the said indictment against the said Thomas Latimer of and concerning the premises in the introductory part of the said second plea mentioned, because he says that the said Thomas Latimer, of his own wrong, and without the cause and matter of defence in his said second plea alleged, falsely, wickedly, and maliciously, wrote and published, and caused to be written and published, so much of the said alleged libels in the said first and fourth counts respectively mentioned, as is in the introductory part of the second plea mentioned, in manner and form as in the said first and fourth counts of the said indictment is alleged. And this the said coroner and attorney prays may be inquired of by the county, &c. And the said Thomas Latimer doth the like. FORMS OF PLEADINGS IN PROCEEDINGS FOR LIBEL (CIVIL). DECLARATIONS. In the Queen's Bench [or Common Pleas, or Exchequer of Pleas]. The day of A.D. Middlesex? A. B., by C. D., his attorney [or in person, if the plaintiff to wit.(a) does not appear by attorney] sues E. F., for that the defendant falsely and maliciously printed and published of the plaintiff in a newspaper called " the words following; that is to say, "he is a regular prover under bankruptcies," the defendant meaning thereby that the plaintiff had proved, and was in the habit of proving fictitious debts against the estates of bankrupts, with the knowledge that such debts were fictitious, and the plaintiff claims £ .(b) Count for a Newspaper Libel on a Shipowner. (Inman v. Jenkins, not reported.) (c) For that at the time of the committing of the grievances hereinafter mentioned, the plaintiffs were, and still are the owners of a fleet of steamers, trading and plying as carriers of mails, of cargo, and of passengers, between, amongst other places, Liverpool and Halifax; and of the said then fleet of steamers one, to wit, the screw steamer "City of Boston," on the 28th of January, 1870, sailed from Halifax aforesaid, with mails, passengers, and cargo, bound for Liverpool, and thereupon the defendant, to wit, on the 12th of March, 1870, falsely and maliciously caused to be printed and published of the plaintiffs, and of the plaintiffs in the way of their trade and business of carriers by sea and shipowners then owning (amongst others) the said screw steamer, the "City of Washington," to wit, in a certain newspaper called the Times, and in the form of a letter to the editor of the said newspaper, and of an extract from a certain other letter, which letter and extract were in the words and figures following: "The City of Boston. To the editor of the Times. Sir, I beg to send to you an extract from a letter dated the 25th ult., just received from a Halifax merchant. I am, sir, your obedient servant, Z. March," and which said extract was printed and published next after the said letter, and was in the words and figures following: "The City of Boston (meaning thereby the plaintiff's said screw steamer, City of Boston), which sailed hence on the 28th January last, has not yet arrived in Liverpool. There is great anxiety felt here for her safety, more especially as there so many of our merchants on board, as you will see by the Chronicle of the 24th ult. She was deeply laden with wheat in bags, being eighteen inches or twenty inches deeper than the insurance As to the venue, vide ante, p. 540. (b) Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, Schedule B., 33. This declaration was, after verdict for plaintiff, held good by the Court of Common Pleas. allows (meaning thereby that the plaintiffs by themselves, and their agents and servants, had improperly caused the said ship to be sent to sea overladen, and in an unseaworthy condition). She sailed from here on a Friday noon, and we had a fearful snowstorm on the following Saturday night. If she encountered this, there is no hope whatever of her turning up. I believe she was in it, as the Orontes, which sailed from here two days before, was caught in it off Newfoundland, and nearly went down. Besides, the City of Boston had only a twofan screw, having broken her own on her outward trip (meaning thereby that the plaintiffs, by themselves and their agents and servants, had improperly sent the said screw steamer, City of Boston, to sea in an unseaworthy and defective state). If she was not in the storm, and has lost her loose screw, she has been driven south, and the Azores will bring her up. In that case we may not hear of her for a month to come; and yet I cannot believe that she escaped the storm, but went down three weeks ago. I hope it may not be so; it will greatly interfere with business, as a great many of our merchants are aboard. Many of us are sending home buyers by this boat, having given up the City of Boston" (thereby meaning that the plaintiffs by themselves, and their agents and servants had been guilty of improper and negligent conduct in the way of their trade and business as shipowners and carriers by sea, and had negligently, wrongfully, and improperly caused the said screw steamer, City of Boston, to be sent to sea in an improper condition, and without proper equipments, and in an unseaworthy state). And by reason of the said libel, the plaintiffs have suffered in their character as shipowners and carriers by sea of mails, of cargo, and of passengers, and their said trade and business have been seriously injured. PLEAS. Plea of the General Issue. In the Queen's Bench [or Common Pleas, or Exchequer of Pleas]. E. F.) ats. The defendant by A. B.) Vide ante, p. 556. day of A.D. his attorney [or in person] says that he is not guilty. Plea of Justification that the Libel is true. That before the alleged grievance J. K. was a trader subject to the statutes then in force concerning bankrupts, and had committed an act of bankruptcy, and became a bankrupt within the meaning of the said statutes, and a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy had been duly filed against him in the Court of Bankruptcy for the district, and he had been duly adjudged bankrupt by the said court; and thereupon the plaintiff falsely and fraudulently pretending to be a creditor of the said J. K. at the time of the said bankruptcy, then assumed to prove, and in due form of law proved, against the estate of the said J. K. as such bankrupt as aforesaid in the said court a debt of £ but the same was a fictitious debt, as the plaintiff at the time of so proving the same well knew; and before the alleged grievance L. M. was a trader, &c. [state in like manner all the instances of the plaintiff having proved fictitious debts.] (Bullen and Loake's Precedents, p. 723.) Plea of Justification to Part of the Libel. (Inman v. Jenkins: see Declaration, ante, p. 743.) And for a second plea as to so much of the declaration as relates to the publishing by the defendant of the words that the defendants vessel was deeply laden with wheat in bags, being eighteen inches or twenty inches deeper than the insurance allows, the defendant says that the defamatory matter in that part of the declaration alleged is true in substance and fact. a As to pleas of justification generally, vide ante, pp. 558-565. Plea denying that the Plaintiff carried on the Trade alleged. That the plaintiff did not carry on the trade or business of as alleged. Vide ante, p. 584. Plea of an Apology and Payment into Court under That the alleged libel was contained in a public weekly newspaper Lor periodical publication] ordinarily published at intervals not exceeding [or exceeding] one week, called the " ," and was inserted in such newspaper [or periodical publication] without actual malice and without gross negligence; and before [or at the earliest opportunity after] the commencement of this action the defendant inserted in such newspaper [or periodical publication] a full apology for the said libel [or offered to publish a full apology for the said libel in any newspaper or periodical publication to be selected by the plaintiff] according to the statute in such case made and provided; and the defendant brings into court the sum of £ by way of amends for the injury sustained by the plaintiff by the publication of the said libel, and says that the said sum is enough to satisfy the claim of the plaintiff in respect thereof. (Bullen and Leake's Precedents, p. 726.) See Jones v. Mackie (L. Rep. 3 Ex. 1). Vide ante, pp. 566–568 and 590. Notice of Intention to give Evidence of an Apology in Mitigation of Between A. B., plaintiff, and E. F., defendant. Take notice that the defendant intends, on the trial of this cause, to give in evidence, in mitigation of damages, that he made [or offered] an apology to the plaintiff for the defamation complained of in the declaration herein, before the commencement of this action [or, as soon after the commencement of this action as there was an opportunity of making or offering such apology, the action having been commenced before there was an opportunity of making or offering such apology]. To Mr. C. D., plaintiff's attorney, [or agent.] Yours, &c. G. H., defendant's attorney, [or agent.] (Bullen and Leake's Precedents, p. 726.) |