Maurice v. Worden

• Decision Date: 30 June 1880
• Citation: 54 Md. 233
• Parties: BERNARD MAURICE v. JOHN L. WORDEN.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

54 Md. 233

BERNARD MAURICE v. JOHN L. WORDEN.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

June 30, 1880

APPEAL from the Court of Common Pleas.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

First and Second Exceptions.--Sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court.

Third Exception.--The plaintiff offered to prove by John Thomson Mason, Esquire, one of the plaintiff's counsel, that he saw, on May 10th, 1879, a paper in the Navy Department at Washington, in the hand-writing of the plaintiff, in the words of the resignation contained in "Plaintiff's Exhibit A," and that on the back of the said paper were written the words, beginning "this resignation is tendered," and signed "John L. Worden," contained in the said "Plaintiff's Exhibit A;" that the said paper was shown him, on request, by one of the clerks of the department, and was at the time of so showing it inspected by several persons besides himself; and further, that he served upon Richard W. Thompson, Secretary of the Navy, the written communication signed by himself and Charles J. Bonaparte, and marked ""Plaintiff's Exhibit B," which is as follows, to wit:

Hon. R W. Thompson,

Secretary of the Navy,

Washington D. C.,

Dear Sir:--We request the privilege of removing from the files of the Navy Department, the original resignation of Professor B Maurice, as assistant professor of French at the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, tendered October 4th, and accepted October 7th, 1872, together with the endorsement thereon of the then Superintendent of the Academy, Rear Admiral John L. Worden.

This paper is needed in an action for libel in the Court of Common Pleas of Baltimore City, between Professor Maurice and Admiral Worden.

Any reasonable security for the proper custody and return of the paper will be given, if required.

We are, sir, yours, very respectfully,

CHARLES J. BONAPARTE,

JOHN THOMSON MASON,

Attorneys for Professor B. Maurice.

And received in due course of mail after the date thereof, the answer thereto, signed by the said Secretary (whose signature he could identify) marked ""Plaintiff's Exhibit C," which is as follows, to wit:

NAVY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, May 12th, 1879.

Gentlemen:--Your letter of the ninth instant, requesting the privilege of removing from the files of this department, the original resignation of Professor B. Maurice, as asst. Professor of French at the U.S. Naval Academy, has been received.

In reply thereto, you are informed that the department finds itself unable to comply with the request to furnish the original paper, inasmuch as the law requires that the records shall be kept safely in the department. The Secretary of the Navy is made personally the custodian. The department will, however, do all in its power to comply with the wishes expressed, which is, as explained in a personal interview with Mr. Mason, to furnish a certified copy of the paper, which is herewith forwarded.

Very respectfully,

(Signed,) R. W. THOMPSON,

Secretary of the Navy.

Messrs. Chas. J. Bonaparte, John Thomson Mason, Attorneys at Law, 15 Lexington street, Baltimore, Md.

And at the same time, and also by mail, the paper marked "Plaintiff's Exhibit D," which is as follows, to wit:

U. S. NAVY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, D. C., May 12, 1879.

I hereby certify that the annexed is a true copy of the original resignation of B. Maurice, as assistant professor of French at the U.S. Naval Academy, now on file in this department.

JOHN W. HOGG,

Chief Clerk.

Be it known that John W. Hogg, whose name is signed to the above certificate, is now and was at the time of so signing, Chief Clerk in the Navy Department, and that full faith and credit are due to all his official attestations as such.

(Place of In testimony whereof, I have hereunto subscribed my name and

Seal of caused the seal of the Navy Department of the United States to

the Navy be affixed at the City of Washington, this 12th day of May, in

Department the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and

of the seventy-nine, and of the Independence of the United States, the

United one hundred and third.

States.)

R. W. THOMPSON,

Secretary of the Navy.

[The copy of the letter and endorsement thereon certified as above, are omitted as unnecessary to a proper understanding of the case.--Rep.]

To the admissibility of this evidence the defendant objected, and the Court, (BROWN, J.,) sustained the objection, and refused to permit the same to be received in evidence. The plaintiff excepted.

Fourth Exception.--The plaintiff then offered in evidence, the paper marked ""Plaintiff's Exhibit D," separately, but the defendant objected to the admissibility of the same in evidence, and the Court sustained the objection, and refused to permit the same to be received in evidence. The plaintiff excepted.

Fifth Exception.--The plaintiff then offered to prove by R. M. Chase, in the first bill of exceptions mentioned, that with the knowledge of the defendant, and as the Secretary of the Naval Academy, and for the purpose of copying them, he read the original resignation of the plaintiff, mentioned in the declaration, and also on the back thereof the words of the endorsement, beginning "this resignation is tendered," and signed "John L. Worden," contained in Plaintiff's Exhibit A, the signature of which words on the original paper was in the defendant's hand-writing, and with the knowledge of the defendant made and retained copies of both of the said writings, and on October 4th, 1872, mailed the originals to the Navy Department at Washington, D. C., all in the discharge of his duty as such Secretary. That the copy thereof, marked "Plaintiff's Exhibit A," was furnished by Admiral Rogers, during the defendant's absence from Annapolis, to the plaintiff, at the latter's request, Admiral Rodgers being then Superintendent, and is a true copy, and that the original copies made by him from the originals have been inspected by Admiral Rodgers, when Superintendent, and the counsel for the plaintiff and defendant in this suit, who asked for them by reason of being such counsel, and are always accessible to the Superintendent of the Academy, the clerks in the witness' office, and, with the Superintendent's permission, to any other person connected with the Naval Academy, and that the defendant knew on October 4th, 1872, by reason of his official position, that they were so accessible to the Superintendent and the clerks of witness' office. To the admissibility of this evidence the defendant objected, and the Court sustained his objection. The plaintiff excepted.

Sixth Exception.--The plaintiff then offered to prove by the witness, R. M. Chase, that the original resignation of the plaintiff with the endorsement thereon, which is the ground of action, was immediately forwarded to the Navy Department, at Washington, D. C. And further offered to prove by himself, his wife, and W. W. Bowie, that enquiries had been made by all three, on numerous occasions between January 5th, 1876, and the time of the defendant's return to Washington, in February, 1878, at the Navy Department, for the said original paper, and that careful search had been made in their presence, by the officials of the department, on all these occasions, for the said paper, and that the same could not be found anywhere among the papers of the said department; and further to prove that the letter marked "Plaintiff's Exhibit E," which is as follows, to wit:

NAVY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, Jany. 6, 1876.

Sir:--Your letter of the fifth instant requesting copies of your resignation as assistant professor at the Naval Academy, and of its acceptance, has been received.

In reply you are informed that there is no record of your resignation on file in the department, but there is a copy of a report from the Superintendent of the Naval Academy, but it is of such a character that the department refrains from sending it unless it is particularly desired.

Very respectfully,

(Signed,) JOHN W. HOGG,

Chief Clerk.

Mr. B. Maurice, Relay House, B. & O. R. R.

--was written to him officially by John W. Hogg, the chief clerk of the said department, and that the signature thereto is in his, the said Hogg's hand-writing; and further, that no copy or other information of the endorsement, or of any report upon his conduct, while at the Naval Academy, was ever furnished him by the department, or any other person, previous to the communication from Admiral Rodgers, marked "Plaintiff's Exhibit A." To this evidence the defendant objected as inadmissible, and the Court sustained the objection and refused to permit the same to be received in evidence. The plaintiff excepted.

Seventh Exception.--The plaintiff then offered to prove by his own testimony, that he held, during six years, the position of assistant professor of French, at the United States Naval Academy, at Annapolis, but was never commissioned or sworn in as an officer or other member of the United States Navy; that about October 1st, 1872, a person, whom the plaintiff considered his personal enemy, was appointed professor of French at the said academy, and head of the department thereof, wherein the plaintiff was employed as a subordinate; that for this reason the plaintiff determined to resign his said position, and on October 4th, tendered to the defendant, then superintendent of the said academy, his resignation thereof in writing, of which resignation those contained in the papers marked "Plaintiff's Exhibits A and D," are true copies; that upon his so tendering his said resignation, the defendant professed great reluctance to receive the same, and much kindly solicitude, lest the plaintiff should injure his prospects in life by too hasty action, and upon the...