agraphs which
appeared in the "Evening Journal" were merely designed as gentle
reminders to the novelist of the folly of the course he was pursuing.
This might find belief in a society in which telling a man that he was
an object of universal contempt would be deemed an expression of
friendly interest in his welfare. When he says, in addition, that there
was no shred, no spice of malice in these assaults, he takes away the
sole ground on which a plea of palliation can be brought. If not due to
that they had not even the poor excuse of weak human nature. They were
the wanton acts of a man who attacks another, not from (p. 197)
indignation or wrath, but from the mere desire of inflicting annoyance
or pain.

The controversy with the "Commercial Advertiser" belongs not here but to
the account of the "Naval History." It has already been said that the
"Tribune" had been sued for the publication of Thurlow Weed's letter
describing the trial at Fonda in November, 1841. In December, 1842, this
case came off at Ballston. Greeley assumed the conduct of the defense.
He was unsuccessful. The jury brought in against him a verdict of two
hundred dollars and costs. "We went back to dinner," he wrote, "took the
verdict in all meekness, took a sleigh and struck a bee-line for New
York." No sooner had he reached the city than he published a most
entertaining account of the whole trial. It filled eleven columns of the
"Tribune," and the demand for it became so great that it was found
necessary to publish it in pamphlet form. For some expressions in it
Cooper began another suit. In this instance Greeley gave up the plan of
defending himself and intrusted the conduct of his side to Seward. The
case dragged on for years in the New York courts, and, so far as I have
been able to discover, had not been brought to a final trial before the
plaintiff's death.

By the end of 1843, Cooper had pretty well reduced the press to silence,
so far as comments on his character were concerned. It was
insignificance or remoteness alone that protected the libeler. The
leading newspapers of the state, however much they might abuse his
writings, learned to be very cautious of what they said of him
personally. But it was a barren victory he had won. He had lost far more
than he had gained. That such would be the result, he knew, while (p. 198)
he was engaged in the controversy. It affected, at the time, his literary
reputation, and, as a result, th