Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/441

 414

The Green Bag

Circuit Court cannot be maintained. The seem to require more than the publication of a resolution begins with a recital that questions portrait, when that portrait purports to be as to the railway company's rights have been the likeness of another.—Ed.] The Court raised, and ends with a direction to the consequently held that a verdict should not city solicitor to take action to enforce the have been directed for the defendant, but city's position. The only action to be ex that "it was the plaintiff's right to prove her pected from a city solicitor is a suit in court. case and go to the jury, and the defendant We cannot take it to have been within the would have got all that it could ask if it had meaning of the direction to him that he been permitted to persuade them, if it could, should take a posse and begin to pull up the to take a contrary view." The Court avoided ruling flat-footedly on the question whether tracks. The order addressed to the com panies to remove their tracks was simply to a statement that one uses intoxicating liquors put them in the position of disobedience, as habitually is defamatory in law, without proof of special damage, but apparently inclined ground for a suit, if the city was right." to the conservative view that it is not, the Defamation. Official Immunity— Over-ad question of damage being one for the jury:— vertisement of Delinquent Taxes. N. H. "Obviously an unprivileged falsehood need The statutory duty of a tax collector was not entail universal hatred to constitute a to post advertisements of overdue taxes in cause of action. No falsehood is thought two or more public places within his town. about or even known by all the world. No The collector in Hutchins v. Page, 72 Atl. conduct is hated by all. That it will be Rep. 689, advertised plaintiff's delinquency known by a large number, and will lead an through two newspapers. The New Hamp appreciable fraction of that number to regard shire Supreme Court ruled that it was not the plaintiff with contempt, is enough to do the collector's duty to publish otherwise than her practical harm. Thus, if a doctor were as required by the statute unless he thought represented as advertising, the fact that it such publication was essential to the success would affect his standing with others of his of the tax sale. If he did not so believe, but profession might make the representation used the occasion to maliciously proclaim actionable, although advertising is not re that the plaintiff had not paid his taxes, puted dishonest, and even seems to be re there is neither legal nor ethical reason why garded by many with pride." an action should not lie. Election Laws. Constitutionality of Illinois Defamation. Wrong Photograph—Identifi Act—Failure to Provide for Registration Fatal cation of Subject of the Libel—Minority Repu to the Act. Ill. tation. U. S. The Supreme Court of Illinois, in a decision Mr. Justice Holmes, in Elizabeth Peck v. rendered June 16 in the case of People v. Tribune Company, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 554, Strassheim, reported in 41 Chicago Legal Laws decided by the United States Supreme Court 379-381 (June 26), pronounced the Illinois May 17 (L. ed. adv. sheets Oct. term 1908, Primary Election Law of 1908 unconstitu p. 554) applied the rule of Lord Mansfield, tional, mainly on the ground that section 44 "whenever a man publishes he publishes at disfranchises voters who through no fault of his peril" to the facts of a case where a por their own have not registered. trait purporting to be that of a nurse, Mrs. Section 44 reads in part: "No person shall vote at a primary unless he shall be a legally A. Schuman, but really that of the plaintiff had been inserted in a whisky advertisement qualified voter under the general election with an indorsement of a certain brand of laws of this state, and unless he declares his whisky which this nurse said she had used party affiliation, as required by this act, and constantly for years. This the Court decided in all cases where registration is required as a to be publication regarding the plaintiff, as a condition precedent to voting at regular elec publication regarding an entirely different tions only registered voters shall be entitled person from that referred to, arising from to vote at such primary. Provided, however, unintentional use of the wrong portrait, is that at such primary any legal voter of a not excused because it was by mistake. precinct, who has not registered, shall be [ Note.—The rule that the plaintiff must be entitled to vote in case he shall file with the capable of being identified as the person primary judges an affidavit, stating the time referred to by the published statement would when he removed into such precinct, and the