{
  "id": 2604840,
  "name": "Danville Press Co. et al. v. Robert P. Harrison",
  "name_abbreviation": "Danville Press Co. v. Harrison",
  "decision_date": "1901-09-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "244",
  "last_page": "250",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "99 Ill. App. 244"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 881,
    "char_count": 15000,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.317852702137001e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4381730363430455
    },
    "sha256": "b2e92f6bef9c379118917f8622b23cb6766eeb16a39cb5ddc3aada2479536e98",
    "simhash": "1:f74ed45e4b3287fe",
    "word_count": 2679
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:49:57.366340+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Danville Press Co. et al. v. Robert P. Harrison."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Wright\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis was a suit by appellee against appellants for damages for the publication of an alleged libelous article in a newspaper called The Danville Daily Press, of which the appellant John Beard was the general manager. The trial by jury ended in a verdict and judgment for $800, to reverse which this appeal is brought, and it- is argued, to effect such reversal, that the court admitted improper evidence, rejected competent evidence, gave wrong instructions and refused proper instructions.'\nThe article published of and concerning appellee, we think was highly libelous and wholly unjustifiable. Its language and sentiments in many respects unfitted it for public prints and we feel compelled, for the same reason, to refrain from reciting it in this opinion. It is enough to say that all the venom that can be engendered by envy and malice appears in every line of it. It contains no clever phrase, but it is the shriek of a vulgar mind dominated by the demon of hate. The article was written by Crayton, the publisher of another paper, and sent to the editor of appellants\u2019 paper and published in its columns. Appellants offered to prove upon the trial that appellee had published an article in the Commercial, a newspaper of which he was the publisher, reflecting upon Crayton, and it is argued these reflections provoked the libel that was afterward published. The court rejected such evidence, as we think, properly; for as we have said before, the publication of the libelous article was wholly unjustifiable, and there was nothing in the Commercial\u2019s reflections that even mitigated the Press article. The appellant Beard claimed he knew nothing of the libel before its publication and had \u25a0 not authorized it to be published, and therefore he should not be held liable for its publication \u2014 and inasmuch as he could not have intentionally or willfully caused its publication he was not liable for punitive damages. The evidence shows, however, that Beard was the general manager of the publication and was authorized by the directors to control the policy of the paper. He had also' assumed to do this, and had employed Bobinson, the editor who published the libel. We think Beard as much responsible for the publication as if he knew the libel was about to be published and did not prevent it. In other words a person can not avoid liability by putting instruments of harm, which he is authorized and it is his duty to control, into the hands of others, and then by abandoning the same in the hands of his agent, be heard to say that the agent acted without his knowledge or consent, after the harm has been accomplished. The instructions of the court on this line applied the correct principles and were therefore right.\nWe find no prejudicial errors in the ruling of the court upon the evidence in the case' nor upon the instructions to the jury, and all that was proper in the refused instructions was contained in those given by the court. In truth the instructions contained as a whole as fair and impartial an exposition of the law as the rights of appellants\u2019 case demanded.\nThe damages were not excessive, and it may be well conceived the jury awarded only actual damages. We are unwilling to say that such a libel, published in the way this one was published \u2014 in the columns of a newspaper having a large circulation, in a populous community, does not actually damage the victim of its venom the whole amount of the verdict that was returned. It is inconceivable to persons of correct thought and sentiment, having a proper regard for the characters and feelings of others in civilized society, how the amount of damages in this suit could afford adequate compensation for the contumely and humiliation of such a libel.\nWe can not presume the jury gave punitive damages, and even if they did, it was proper against both defendants\u2014 at least within the right of the jury to do so, in their sound discretion. If the appellant Beard had no actual knowledge of the libel \u2014 and from the evidence he probably did not \u2014 still if he neglected to control his agent in this respect, and that he did, that was equivalent to a reckless disregard of the rights of others which was equal to a willful or intentional wrong.\nThe judgment will be affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Wright"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Kimbrough & Meeks and Winter & Rearick, attorneys for appellants.",
      "George T. Buckingham and O. M. Jones, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Danville Press Co. et al. v. Robert P. Harrison.\n1. Libel \u2014 Liability of Newspapers Published by Corporations.\u2014 Where a newspaper is published and controlled by a corporation, one who is merely an officer of the corporation is not responsible individually for libelous publications made without his knowledge or consent, but it is otherwise where such officer is the general manager of the paper and authorized by the directors of the corporation to control its policy.\n2. Same \u2014 Evidence of Provocation, When Inadmissible. \u2014 The fact that the person libeled had previously published in a newspaper controlled by him an article reflecting upon the author of the libel in question and which provoked its publication is no defense to an action for its publication.\n3. Damages \u2014 Where $800 is Not Excessive. \u2014 In an action for publishing in the columns of a newspaper having a large circulation in a populous community, an article concerning the plaintiff, highly libelous and wholly unjustifiable in language and sentiments, and in many respects unfit for publication, a verdict for \u00a7800 is not excessive.\ni. Same \u2014 Punitive Damages \u2014 When Proper in Actions for Libel.\u2014 Where the general manager of a corporation engaged in the publication of a newspaper neglects to control his employes in respect to what shall appear in the paper and a libel is published, such neglect is equivalent to a reckless disregard of the rights of others, equal to a willful or intentional wrong, and renders both the manager and the corporation liable to be mulcted in exemplary damages. .\n5. Same \u2014 WTiere the Court Will Not Presume that Punitive Damages Were Allowed. \u2014 Where the damages awarded in an action for publishing a libel are not excessive the court will not presume the jury allowed anything for exemplary damages.\nTrespass on the Case, for the publication of a libel. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion County; the Hon. Henry Van Seller, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1901.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed September 11, 1901.\nRehearing denied November 20, 1901.\nCopy of the Libel Sued Upon.\n\u201c Trouble Has Begun \u2014 Editor Crayton Fires a Lyddite Bomb into Bluff Rider\u2019s Camp \u2014 Pays Respects to Harrison \u2014 He Reproaches Mr. Jewell and Gives Capt. Yeager His Dues in His Own Inimitable Manner.\nThe following is taken from this week\u2019s edition of the Potomac Republican and it amply verifies the prediction of The Press of a few days ago, that the Commercial had started something fierce when it jumped onto the young editor of the Artesian City for roasting the Bluff Riders. In several places The Press has taken the liberty of drawing a pencil through a few lines as a mark of courtesy and commiseration for the Commercial editor. The Press is very sorry to see two good republican brothers tearing at each other\u2019s throats in such a fashion but it seems to be a republican fashion much in vogue of late and about all we can do is to stand at a safe distance and yell Go it bear, go it wife,\u2019 like the veteran backwoodsman whose better half had an adventure with bruin, trusting to the best man to win out in the struggle. Here is Brother Crayton\u2019s hot stuff from Potomac:\n\u2018 FROM EDITOR CRAYTON.\nTuesday\u2019s Commercial contained a scurrilous personal attack upon the editor of the Republican, written by a sickly young buzzard, who is the journalistic joke of Danville; who wants to be a politician when nature made him a fool, and aspires to be a dictator when God created him a jackass.\nHis name is Robert Harrison.\nHe says we asked Capt. Yeager to take us back into the battery; he says we are fighting republican institutions; he says we \u201c marched with Coxey.\u201d\nBefore we begin talking to this sore-eyed paralytic, of whom John Beard offers to bet that a scientific test will show that he hasn\u2019t two ideas above a baboon, we want to inform the half-dozen people here who read the Commercial what he is talking about.\nLast week we wrote a private letter to Superintendent R. B. Holmes to which was added a postscript that read thus:\n\u201c P. S. \u2014 I see that the battery is going to China. Tell Yeager that if he will let me go along I\u2019ll take back everything I said about him.\u201d\nHow how this chalk-faced young specimen of lost manhood got it we can\u2019t say. We do not believe that Mr. Holmes would give up a private letter for publication. Heither do we care. As our readers can plainly see it was written in jest. Why, Battery A stands about as much show of going to China as Bob Harrison does of having an honest principle.\nAnother word as to his \u201cidea of Capt. Yeager.\u201d We do not like Capt. Yeager and he does not like us, so it is an even split. Capt. Yeager is a man of ability. As a drillmaster and disciplinarian he had few equals among the volunteer officers. We want to give the devil his dues. That\u2019s \u201c Cap.\u201d And the bare mention that an animated Egyptian mummy like Harrison could have any sort of a notion is laughable. That is how we tried to buy our way into the battery. The idea! Why don\u2019t someone kill the idiotic skunk ? Why, if we wanted to go to war there are plenty of chances. We might join the \u201cBough Eiders.\u201d\nMr. Harrison says we \u201c marched with Coxey.\u201d Mr. Harrison, is simply a liar. We never saw Coxey or his army in our life. That is but a pleasant tale we told for twenty-two caliber intellects like Harrison to believe.\nHe says we are fighting republicanism. This will also be laughable to the readers of the Bepublican who know us. We do not like the \u201cBough Eider\u201d idea and we said so. But we did not accuse Harrison of secreting it. Why, if an idea was to get into that monkey head of his it would kill him.\nMr. Harrison used to like us. We can rake up old files of the Commercial where Mr. Harrison said nice things about us and reprinted pieces from the Bepublican. Why this sudden change? It takes but a few words to tell.' Last spring we assisted a number of other republicans in throwing Mr. Harrison\u2019s father-in-law so high that he caught a glimpse of the pearly gates. Mr. Harrison feeds at the family crib. So it hurts Mr. Harrison.\nThe argument that he uses shows that he is hurt. We hate that, but we are not going to run this great journal of reform to suit him. We can give Mr. Harrison all the journalistic row he wants. We can also whip him, if that is what he wants.\nSo you see we are occupying the easy chair.\nIt will be seen that Mr. Harrison does not rely upon anything but \u201c mud slinging \u201d to gain his point, and it can also be seen that the article is purely personal. He has been up here for several days and probably went home with instructions to flay us. Before the mangy cur gets through with it he will discover that where we come from they flay one another.\n\u2018We w.ould not advise the \u201c Rough Riders\u201d to delegate to Mr. Harrison the task of defending them. He is a poor, little, cowardly, white-livered sneak with about as much honor as a striped hyena.\nA Rough Rider! Him a Rough Rider! Wearing the uniform of a soldier! Why, we could take a willow switch and run him until he fell from exhaustion. That poor, measly, idiotic parietic has not kidney enough to look into the cannon down at the Armory.\nHim go to war! Why, they would hitch him up in the wagon train!\nThere is only one place he could possibly fill. After all armies follow a swarm of human vultures that creep upon the field of battle when the fight is over and under the cover of the black of night rob the dead and murder the wounded for loot. Vampire Harrison! That\u2019s what he would be. Soldiers shoot such scavengers on sight.\nHarrison, the political leader, a member of the \u201c brother-in-law combination.\u201d Why, he hasn\u2019t brains enough to grease the fly-wheel of a lady\u2019s watch, nor principle enough to keep him out of jail if he had sense enough to be wicked. To think that that half-baked cuss could have any influence over anybody with as much character as a yellow dog! If the judges were to enforce the \u201cnon compos mentis\u201d clause he wouldn\u2019t be allowed to vote.\nFor heaven\u2019s sake, Mr. Jewell, what do you mean by letting such pulp-headed infants mix up in political affairs ? Do you want a mortgage on the rest of the Commercial\u2019s\nstuff? This political role is a new thing. We were informed that he had been trying to break into Danville society for the past five years, but he never got closer than; the outside door. He may come up into the country and make his relatives believe he is a great man, but he don\u2019t fool the rest of the farmers. They know an idiot by the shape of his forehead.\nWho is Robert Harrison?\nHe is a freak from the Indiana woods that tried to report on a Chicago \u201cfly-by-night\u201d sheet and failed. He then mortgaged his mother\u2019s farm and bought a newspaper, and then had to mortgage the newspaper to keep alive. That\u2019s the business ability of the man that wants to be manager of the republican party.\nIf it wasn\u2019t for his cousin the Commercial wouldn\u2019t last until sundown. They tell us that John Harrison is a gentleman.\nOh, we have forgotten. He is an orator. All the farmers remember the county convention and when the \u201cunit\u201d amendment was in danger of being lost. Jewell was stroking his wise old head. He was puzzled what to do next. Bill Cannon was for a moment in a quandary. Hot so with Bob. He was \u201cnext.\u201d He rushed upon the floor with the air of a Demosthenes and said six words loud enough to be heard ten feet away. Then he grew pale and turning his back to the audience collapsed.\nAnother great speech that had been set up late at night had died \u201ca homin\u2019.\u201d\nHe is a coward, because A. B. Hill, whom everybody whips, made him run like a turkey.\nAn indecent personal attack like that would never emanate from any one with the first instincts of a man. And he isn\u2019t one. Look at the pale, bleached out little insect, look at his starved carcass, his long, flapping, mulish, ears, his big, expressionless, owlish eyes, and that sickly simper on his face that makes a man want to offer it someth into eat. If it isn\u2019t an animal, what is it?\nWe may in our young and bucky days have been wicked. We have not denied it. We are never afraid that the angels will swoop down and bear us away on the account of our purity but there is one thing that we never have been. We have woke up in the middle of the night when the stars were twinkling in the swart heavens and thanked God that, we was not born a fool.\nWe have never stolen anything. We wouldn\u2019t say that for Harrison. We are morally certain that he stole that sickly grin from the striped hyena and his personal beauty from the kangaroo.\u2019 \u201d\nKimbrough & Meeks and Winter & Rearick, attorneys for appellants.\nGeorge T. Buckingham and O. M. Jones, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0244-01",
  "first_page_order": 270,
  "last_page_order": 276
}