Urban v. Helmick

• Decision Date: 11 July 1896
• Citation: 45 P. 747,15 Wash. 155
• Parties: URBAN ET AL. v. HELMICK ET AL.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

45 P. 747

15 Wash. 155

URBAN ET AL. v. HELMICK ET AL.

Supreme Court of Washington

July 11, 1896

Appeal from superior court, Skagit county; Henry McBride, Judge.

Action by Louise Urban and another against Marion Helmick and others for libel. Demurrers to the complaint were sustained, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Thomas B. Hardin and Pierre P. Ferry, for appellants.

Sinclair & Smith, for respondent Helmick.

Robinson & Rowell, for respondents Ackman, Wood & Wood.

GORDON J.

The appellants (plaintiffs in the court below) were, at the time of the commencement of this action, engaged in the hotel business at Sedro, in Skagit county. The respondents Lovett M. Wood and wife were the owners of the weekly newspaper known as "The Trade Register," published at the city of Seattle, of which newspaper said Lovett M. Wood was editor and publisher, and the respondent Ackman was associate editor. This action was instituted in the superior court for Skagit county to recover damages which appellants alleged they sustained by reason of the publication in said newspaper of the following article, written by the respondent Helmick viz.:

"Live and Let Live.

"Sedro, Wn., Nov. 15, 1894.

"Editor Trade Register: I am a strong believer in the old saying 'Live and let live'; but in some localities there are hogs, called 'business men,' that want it all. I believe in buying at home, and building up our own trade and town as much as possible; as, the more business we do, the more money there is circulated at home. We have a hotel here that does not believe in that kind of business, and will not trade at home, but sends to Seattle for supplies. As this hotel gets most of its money from traveling salesmen who come to Sedro, I wish to say to them that I will not buy any goods of them or the house they represent if they stop at the Hotel Sedro from now on, or as long as they buy from Seattle or elsewhere. Neither will I buy from the Seattle house selling to them through some one else. When a business man will not trade at home, he does not deserve the patronage of the traveling public.

"Respectfully yours,

"Marion Helmick, Grocer."

After setting out the article, the complaint, by way of innuendo alleges: That "defendants meant to be understood, and were understood, by all of the friends, acquaintances, and patrons of these plaintiffs, and by the readers of said newspaper, and by the public generally, to charge these plaintiffs, as individuals and in the management of said hotel business, with being 'hogs,' thereby meaning that these plaintiffs, as individuals and in the management of said hotel business, were possessed of and controlled and actuated by the low, dirty, groveling, grasping, gluttonous self-seeking, and selfish instincts and characteristics of hogs or swine, and were possessed of and actuated by all of the instincts and characteristics of hogs or swine; and that said letter *** was *** published by said defendants with the intent thereby to provoke these plaintiffs and each of them to wrath, and to expose these plaintiffs and each of them to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule, and to deprive these plaintiffs and each of them of the benefit of public confidence and social intercourse, and to injure and destroy the business of these plaintiffs; *** and the said letter and publication thereby tended to and did expose these plaintiffs and each of them to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule, and tended to and did deprive these plaintiffs and each of them of the benefits of public confidence and social intercourse, and did greatly injure these plaintiffs and their business. *** That these plaintiffs, by the wrongful acts of the defendants aforesaid, etc., have been damaged in the sum of $2,000." Respondents separately demurred to the...