The libel action brought by Mr. Marks, the editor and
pro- prietor of the Financial News, against Mr. Butterfield, which has occupied the Recorder's Court for the past week, ended on Wednesday in a verdict of " Not guilty." Mr. Butterfield published a pamphlet in which it was alleged that Mr. Marks, " after overdoing New York," was engaged "in exploiting London," and in which was also set forth what was de- scribed as " a sad story told by one of his victims." In other words, the prosecutor's conduct, both personal and financial, was strongly assailed. After hearing a great deal of evidence in regard to certain business transactions, and as to Mr. Marks's relations with and treatment of a Mrs. Koppel, the jury found for Mr. Butterfield, and added : " We find that the libel is true, that the plea of justification is made out, and that the publication was for the public benefit." The Recorder at once declared that he "entirely disagreed with the verdict." " The law was that there must be satisfactory evidence for the jury on every point ; and he had pointed out that there was no evidence in support of the title-page of the pamphlet." That is, the Judge declared that the jury had pronounced upon allegations which he had intended to withdraw from their view, as unsupported by sufficient evidence. As to the legal merits of so technical a point, we cannot offer any opinion ; but apart from this, the verdict appears to us to do substantial justice, and to be in accordance with the testimony of the witnesses. The manner in which Mr. Gill, the counsel for Mr. Butterfield, "stood up " to Sir Charles Russell throughout the case, has been much commented upon. His remarks were not always quite fair or in good taste, but they received the sympathy both of the public and of the Bar, who do not at all relish the great advocate's airs of superiority and infallibility.
Previous page
