Post Pub. Co. v. Hallam

Decision Date09 December 1893
Docket Number120.
Citation59 F. 530
PartiesPOST PUB. CO. v. HALLAM.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

Statement by TAFT, Circuit Judge:

This was a writ of error to reverse the judgment of the circuit court in favor of Theodore F. Hallam against the Post Publishing Company for $2,500 for libel.

After the proper averments of jurisdiction, the petition of the plaintiff below stated his case as follows:

'Prior to October 14, 1892, plaintiff, as was well known to the people of Kenton county, Kentucky, where he lived, and to the people of Hamilton county Ohio, and other counties of Ohio, was a candidate, in competition with Albert S. Berry similarly well known to be such candidate, and in competition with other candidates, for the nomination before the Democratic convention of the sixth Kentucky congressional district, for the office or representative in the congress of the United States for said district. That for a long time prior to and on October 14, 1892, defendant was engaged in the business of composing, printing, publishing, and circulating a daily newspaper called the Cincinnati Post, which paper it claimed on that day had a daily circulation more than double that of any other daily paper in Ohio, save one in Cleveland, and a circulation in Cincinnati and Hamilton county on week days 10,000 in excess of the combined circulation of the English morning papers and the only other English evening paper. Prior to the meeting of said convention, which met at Warsaw, Kentucky, plaintiff contracted with the St. Nicholas, a company engaged in the business of catering and keeping a hotel, acting through E. N. Roth, to furnish, on board the steamer Henrietta, food and drink for the use of delegates and friends of said Hallam, who were about to proceed on said steamer to Warsaw to attend said convention, for which said food and drink so to be furnished, and which was thereafter furnished, by said St. Nicholas, said Hallam agreed to pay said St. Nicholas. At said convention, after it had been in session for several days, and many ballots had been taken without a nomination being reached, said plaintiff finally requested the delegates from his county, who had continuously voted for him, to cast their next ballot for said Berry, and thereupon on the next ballot, by the aid of the votes so cast by the delegates from Kenton county, said Berry was nominated as the candidate for said office by said convention on September 30, 1892. And thereafter, on October 14, 1892, defendant, knowing the premises, composed and published in its said newspaper, of and concerning the plaintiff and his conduct as a candidate for nomination at the hands of said convention, the following false, malicious, and libelous article:

"Berry Paid.

"Expenses of Theo. Hallam in the Sixth (Ky.) District Contest for the Nomination of a Democrat for Congress.

"The Berry-Hallam congressional fight in the sixty Kentucky district is still on,--that is to say, Banquo's ghost bobs up now and then, to the annoyance of the congressional nominee, Berry, and the mortification of the defeated candidate, Theo. F. Hallam. The Boone County Recorder delivers a broadside at the Kenton county delegates, and naively asks: 'Why don't they come out and tell the truth about what induced them to go to Berry? The world knows.' Yes, the world knows, and you may say Mars and the planets know it also. Proprietor Roth, of the St. Nicholas Hotel, has an inside cinch on this inside information. Everyone knows Colonel Berry. He is a monopolist, corporation controller, millionaire speculator, political wirepuller, first-class hustler, and a pretty good sort of a fellow. Hallam is a successful lawyer at Covington; but legal eminence does not mean the fat incomes that are its synonyms on this side of the Ohio. Hallam is one of the bhoys, loves ward politics for the fun, if not the emoluments, and is about as poor as a church mouse. In fact, he owes several hundred dollars for taxes. The two counties, Kenton and Campbell, threw out their hooks for the congressional nomination. Kenton swore by Hallam, while Campbell vowed that the political friend and chum of Carlisle, Cassius M. Clay, Jr., and Charles J. Helm, their own millionaire and boss, Albert S. Berry, should be the nominee. The fight waxed hot. The convention was held at Warsaw, commencing on September 27th, and ending September 30th. The Kenton boys prepared for the fray. The principal preparation consisted in engaging the steamer Henrietta to carry the delegates to Warsaw, and the carte blanche orders of Mr. Roth, of the St. Nicholas hostelry, to fill her up from truck to keelson with the best the cellar and the larder of the house afforded. As one delegate remarked: 'Why, the champagne flowed off the decks so much that even the Henrietta was swimming in it.' Hallam and his crowd did all the feasting and the drinking. The Campbell county men were not in it. But the bill was made out to Colonel A. S. Berry. Here is the bill: 'St. Nicholas. Edward N. Roth. Cincinnati, October 10, 1892. Colonel A. S. Berry, per Theodore F. Hallam, to the St. Nicholas Hotel Company, Dr.: For meals, service, wine, and cigars served on board the steamer Henrietta, $865.15.'' Then again: 'At Warsaw the battle raged four days. On the last day Colonel Berry and Lawyer Hallam were seen to go arm in arm to the rear of the courthouse, where the convention was held. They had a quiet and confidential chat. At its conclusion Hallam called his warriors about him, and spoke to them in whispers. Immediately thereafter the whole Kenton county delegation cast its vote for Colonel Berry, and he received the nomination. Is Colonel Berry carrying out all and every one of the promises he made? Ah, there's the rub. Mr. Roth, of the St. Nicholas, has sent a bill of $865.15 to Colonel A. S. Berry. That bill is for 'dry' and 'wet' provisions ordered by Hallam, and disposed of by Hallam's supporters. Such generosity on the part of the victor to the vanquished is truly touching.' Thereby meaning that said Hallam, had requested his supporters, the delegates from Kenton county to said convention, to cast their votes upon the conclusive ballot for said Berry, in pursuance of a corrupt understanding or bargain between said Hallam and Berry, and for a pecuniary consideration to be paid by said Berry, and particularly upon the understanding that, in consideration of said Hallam's procuring the said delegates from Kenton county to cast their votes on said ballot for said Berry, said Berry would pay to the said St. Nicholas the bill for the food and drink which said Hallam had ordered, and for payment of which said Hallam was liable to said St. Hicholas. Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment against defendant for damages in the sum of ten thousand dollars.'

The answer of the Post Publishing Company was as follows:

'And now comes the Post Publishing Company, defendant in the above cause, and for answer to the petition therein says: It admits that it is a corporation organized under the laws of Ohio, and a resident of that state. It admits that prior to October 14, 1892, the plaintiff was a candidate in competition with Albert S. Berry at the Democratic convention for nomination of a Democratic candidate for congress in that district. It admits that it was engaged on October 14th in printing and publishing the Cincinnati Post, of the circulation described in the said petition. It admits that plaintiff contracted with the St. Nicholas Company, or Hotel, for the supply of provisions, food, and drink for the use of delegates attending said convention; that said food and drink were thereafter furnished on board the steamer Henrietta, and, if need be, elsewhere, for which the plaintiff was to become, and did become, indebted. It admits that, after a session of several days of the said convention without nomination, the delegation from Kenton county, being the county of the plaintiff, at plaintiff's request cast their votes on a final ballot for said Berry, and thereby secured his nomination on the 30th day of September, 1892, having previous thereto continuously supported plaintiff as against said Berry. It admits that it published in the Cincinnati Post the article contained in said petition, but denies each and every other allegation thereof.'

The evidence of the plaintiff and his witnesses tended to show that the charge or insinuation that he had received any consideration for influencing his supporters to transfer their votes to Berry was wholly unfounded; that Campbell, the Covington reporter of the defendant, falsely representing himself by telephone to be Berry's son, requested the St. Nicholas Hotel to make out Hallam's bill, and deliver it to the messenger he would send; that, thereafter, another employe of the defendant, also representing himself as Berry's son, went to the St. Nicholas Hotel, and got the bill against Hallam, but afterwards brought it back, and said that he did not want the bill made to Hallam, but to Berry per Hallam, and the bill to Col. A. S. Berry per Theodore F. Hallam was accordingly made out and delivered to him; that this conduct of the reporters of the defendant was without the knowledge or consent of Hallam or Berry. The evidence for defendant tended to show that the employes of defendant had not suggested the form of the hotel bill, and to show good faith and no malice in the publication.

The article set forth in the petition was an abridged statement of the contents of a much longer, more detailed, and more conspicuous and sensational article, which appeared in a paper published by the defendant, called the Kentucky Post. In the longer article was printed a fac simile of the bill obtained from the St. Nicholas Hotel by defendant's employes. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
71 cases
  • Castro v. Superior Court
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • July 17, 1970
    ...of adducing legal proofs that the alleged libel was true in all its factual particulars. See, e.g., Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, 59 F. 530, 540 (C.A.6th Cir. 1893); see also Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 892 (1949). Under such a rule, would-be crit......
  • Kutcher v. Post Printing Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • April 12, 1915
    ......Maloney, 5 A. 395 (Ver.); Tanner v. Embree, 99 P. 547 (Calif.); Mattice v. Wilcox, . 42 N.E. 270 (N. Y.); Weston v. Grand Rapids Pub. Co., 87 N.W. 258 (Mich.); Bee Pub. Co. v. Shields, 94 N.W. 1029 (Neb.), affirmed on rehearing, 99. N.W. 822. Nearly every question propounded ... 850; Bee Pub. Co. v. Shields, 68 Neb. 750, 94 N.W. 1029, 99 N.W. 822; Mertens v. Pub. Co. (Neb.), 99. N.W. 847; Hallam v. Post Pub. Co., 55 F. 456, 59 F. 530; Merry v. Pub. Co. (N. J.), 74 A. 464;. Lauder v. Jones, 13 N.D. 525, 101 N.W. 907;. Gatewood v. ......
  • United States v. Toledo Newspaper Co.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Ohio
    • January 23, 1915
    ...... proceedings in a pending case. The distinction is plain. between an ex post facto comment on a decision, or a mere. libel of a judge, on the one hand, and, on the other, an. ... animo, as in libel. Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, . 59 F. 530, 8 C.C.A. 201 (Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals);. Van Derveer v. Sutphin, 5 Ohio ... King v. Root, 4 Wend. (N.Y.) 113 (21 Am.Dec. 102). ' State v. Bee Pub. Co., supra. . . It is. urged that it is neither averred nor proven that any of the. ......
  • New York Times Company v. Sullivan
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 9, 1964
    ...of adducing legal proofs that the alleged libel was true in all its factual particulars. See, e.g., Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, 59 F. 530, 540 (C.A.6th Cir. 1893); see also Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 892 (1949). Under such a rule, would-be crit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT