ds to
teach; of a _clergyman_ that he is immoral, or "preaches lies" or is a
"drunkard" or "perjurer"; of an _attorney_ that he offered himself as a
witness in order to divulge the secrets of his client, or that he
"betrayed his client," or "would take a fee from both sides," or that he
"deserves to be struck off the roll"; of a _physician_ that he is an
"empiric," or "mountebank," or "quack," or "vends quack medicines"; of a
_mechanic_ that he is ignorant of his trade; of a _judge_ that he lacks
capacity and has abandoned the common principles of truth; and of anyone
_in public office_ of a charge of malfeasance or want of capacity to
fulfill its duties.

So also personal criticism of an _author_ might go so far as to injure
him in his business as an author and come within the rule. And so of any
other occupation from which the injured person derives pecuniary
benefit.

CHARGING WITH A CRIME

It is hardly necessary, except for completeness, to add that to charge a
person with _any crime_ brings the publication within the definition of
libel.

If matter libelous _per se_ is published falsely concerning a person he
is _presumed_ to have suffered loss without proving the specific amount
or the manner of loss, the amount of damages being found by the jury in
accordance with the circumstances of the case and various legal rules.

If the language complained of does not come within the foregoing
definitions and limitations, and is not therefore libelous _per se_,
still, if untrue, it may furnish the basis for a libel suit _where it
has resulted in pecuniary loss or the loss of other material advantage_.

"Any false words are actionable," say the courts, "by which the party
has sustained _special damage_."

But special damages have to be proved. That is to say, in such case,
excluding general damages arising from a _per se_ libel, the character
and manner of the loss and the amount in dollars and cents must be
proved, and the verdict should not exceed such amount.

A single illustration will be sufficient for this class.

A newspaper _falsely_ publishes that a man has died of the smallpox at a
certain hotel. The proprietor brings a libel suit, claiming loss of
custom by way of special damage. His recovery would be limited to such
special damages as he could fairly show.

Libel has been defined above as "_malicious_ defamation," etc. But it is
not generally necessary that the injured complainant should prove actua