Dr. H.P. MURRAY, of Plymouth, brought suit against B.F. HALLSEY, of Roper, on Monday last, alleging that the defendant had spoken of and concerning him the following false slanderous and malicious language: “That Dr. H.P. MURRAY is not a safe practitioner; that Dr. MURRAY is no gentleman, and does not know as much about medicine as my old horse; that MURRAY is not fit to practice medicine; that if Dr. MURRAY had anything to do with an operation for strangulated hernia on one Charles ALLEN, said ALLEN would certainly die.”

The case was called for trial before Justice J.S. CHESSON on Tuesday at 2 o’clock pm. B.F. HALLSEY appeared and plead guilty to all the charges except the last.

The following witnesses testified for the plaintiff: Wm. H. DAILY testified that he had heard B.F. HALLSEY say on one occasion that Dr. MURRAY gave a prescription, which, had the druggist filled it and the patient taken the medicine, would have produced death; that he had heard B.F. HALLSEY say that other men who knew nothing of medicine, knew as much as Dr. MURRAY; that HALLSEY makes these assertions publicly everywhere and anywhere, and has been doing so for the last three months. On cross-examination by Dr. HALLSEY this witness asked if he heard the defendant say anything about the ALLEN case; witness answered: “I heard you say ALLEN would die.”

J.W. GAYLORD, a witness for the plaintiff, testified; “I have heard B.F. HALLSEY say that Dr. WARD did not recognize Dr. MURRAY as a physician.”

Dr. S. HASSELL, of Roper, a witness for the plaintiff, testified that he had talked with HALLSEY frequently, and had heard HALLSEY make sleight remarks about MURRAY. That he did not think the defendant had been friendly towards the plaintiff for at least a year. That after the operation on ALLEN had been performed he met HALLSEY, and was asked by HALLSEY if the operation had been performed and who did it, and on being told by Dr. HASSELL that it had been, and that Dr. MURRAY did it, HALLSEY said, sarcastically, he, (ALLEN), will die. That since the bringing of this action HALLSEY has attempted to explain that he meant that ALLEN would die, not because Dr. MURRAY performed the operation, but because it had been performed. Dr. HASSELL further testified that Dr. MURRAY’s standing in the Medical Association of North Carolina was good – No. 1. That Dr. HALLSEY was not a member of the Medical Association, but attended the meeting of the State Medical Examining Board at Elizabeth City last year for the purpose of obtaining a license from said Board. On his return home HALLSEY said: “I got through, but .” This closed the testimony for the plaintiff.

The defendant offered no evidence.

The case was argued by Mr. A.O. GAYLORD, for the plaintiff. No counsel for the defendant.

Mr. GAYLORD argued that the language used by HALLSEY in the presence of Mr. DAILY and many others, was slanderous per se. That it was the duty of HALLSEY to sustain the charge he had made against MURRAY, and failing, as he does in this case to produce any evidence to sustain them, he simply admits not only that he made the charges, but also that they were both false and malicious. That HALLSEY’s assertions that Dr. MURRAY knew nothing about medicine, and had given a prescription that would have produced death, was language that no man ought to use, unless he was prepared to sustain the charge, and when HALLSEY admits that the charge is false, that Dr. MURRAY in fact never gave any such prescription, he, HALLSEY, deserve more punishment than this court, or any other court, can inflict under law, as it now is.

That such language is malicious, there can be no doubt, and deserves the condemnation of this court, and of the entire country.

Mr. GAYLORD further argued that the testimony of Dr. HASSELL showed conclusively that Dr. MURRAY is preemintely worthy of the confidence of the people, and that the language used by Dr. HALLSEY could not damage him, except in communities where he was not known. That the object of this action is not to collect money out of HALLSEY, but to force him to admit before the public, that the charges he had made against Dr. MURRAY were false and malicious. This has been accomplished, and Dr. HALLSEY stands convicted before the court and the country on a winful and malicious attack upon the professional character of Dr. MURRAY.

In conclusion, Mr. GAYLORD said that the plaintiff would not ask the court for judgment against the defendant but for only one cent, as Dr. MURRAY would not, under any circumstances, receive money from the defendant as a punishment for the wrong done him.

The court then rendered judgement against the defendant for one cent and costs, as demanded by plaintiff.

Source: Roanoke Beacon, 25 July 1890, pg 3. Available online at digitalnc.org.