State v. Syphrett

Citations

• 27 S.C. 29
• 2 S.E. 624
• 1887 S.C. LEXIS 92

Syllabus

<p>1. In prosecutions for libel it is the duty of the trial judge to declare to the jury the law applicable thereto, and if he errs in so doing, such errors may be reviewed on appeal to this court. The constitutional provision that “in all indictments for libel, the jury shall be the judges of the law and the facts,” does not prevent the presiding judge from instructing the jury as to the law, nor this court from entertaining an appeal from a conviction.</p> <p>2. Where an indictment upon its face is sufficient to sustain the charge there made, but insufficient to support the offence as disclosed by the evidence, judgment cannot be arrested, even though the evidence fails to sustain the charge as made.</p> <p>3. Is it necessary that an indictment for libel upon a private individual, where the libel has been published, should contain an allegation of intent to provoke a breach of the peace ? But if not published, except to the person libelled, such an allegation is necessary.</p> <p>4. Where the defendant sent a libellous letter, sealed, to the prosecutor, who, not being able to read, got his wife to read it to him, there was no publication of the libel by the defendant — it not being shown that the defendant knew that the prosecutor could not read.</p>