Page 551, lines 5 and 10; strike out "1 R. S. 134," and "2 id. 517," and insert "2 R. L. 134," and "2 R. S. 517." CASES IN Law and Equity IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. ANNA TAIT vs. SALINA CULBERTSON and ANDREW CULBERTSON, her husband. At common law an action lay against husband and wife jointly, for a libel written and published by the wife, alone; and a general judgment could be rendered against them both, if the charge were established. This rule has not been changed, by statute, in this State. A PPEAL from an order denying a new trial, and from a judgment rendered for the plaintiff, against both defendants, on a verdict. Brown & Beach, for the appellant. Hubbard & Wright, for the respondent. Tait v. Culbertson. By the Court, FOSTER, J. The only question in the case is whether an action can be maintained against husband and wife for a libel uttered and published by the wife. The action was tried at a circuit court held in and for the county of Jefferson, before MULLIN, J., and a jury. The libel against the plaintiff was proved to have been uttered and published by the defendant Salina Culbertson alone; and it appeared that she was, at the time of such publication, the wife of the defendant Andrew Culbertson, and so continued at the time of the trial. At the commencement of the trial the defendant Andrew Culbertson moved to dismiss the complaint as against him, substantially on the ground that he could not be made liable for the libel of his wife, and was therefore not a proper party to the action. The motion was denied, and the defendants' counsel excepted. At the close of the plaintiff's testimony, and again at the close of the whole evidence, a motion was made on behalf of the husband for a nonsuit upon the same grounds, which the court denied, and to which decision the defendants' counsel excepted. The court was then asked to direct a verdict for the husband, which it refused, and "charged the jury that if they found that the defendant Salina Culbertson, the wife of the defendant Andrew Culbertson, wrote and published the alleged article, and found a verdict against her, then the plaintiff would be entitled to a general verdict against both defendants." To which refusal, and also to which charge, the defendants' counsel excepted. The jury found a verdict against both defendants for $500. A motion for a new trial was made, on the judge's minutes, and was denied; which was excepted to by the defendants' counsel, and judgment was entered according to the verdict, for the plaintiff, for damages and costs, and the defendants appealed. The counsel do not question that, at common law, the husband could be sued jointly with his wife, for a libel |