422 FKDERAIi BBPOBTEB. �that it should be honestly, laid out, built, and carried through. For this reaaon the character of the plaintifif, as a constructor and manager of railroads, seems to me to be open to public discussion -when he cornes forward with so great and important a project affectiug many interests besides those of the shareholders of one road; and that, therefore, the defendants, or any other persons, have the qualified privilege whioh attaches to discussions of public affairs. The dis- tinction is this : that when a railroad is to be built, or a company to build it is to be chartered, the question whether it shall be authorized is a public one; when the company is organized and the stock is issued, anything whioh merely afiects the value of the stock is private. Demurrer to the answer overruled. �Note. The privUego which a communication receives arises from a right to say what is complained of, or from a sense of duty, public or private, legal or moral. Portevin v. Morgan, 10 Low. Com. Jur. 99 ; see Street^ v. Wood. 15 Barb. 105; Hanna v. De Blanquiere, 11 Up. Caa.Q. B.310; Hearne v. 8towell, 12 Ad. & E. 719. Fublishing what is true of a person is net an offence if done with good motives and for justifiable ends, [De Bouillon v. PeopU, 2 Hill, 248,) where the object is to impart nseful information to the commu- nity. State v. Bumham, 9 N. H. 34; Morris v. Com. 1 Va. Cas. 176; Oom. v. Clay, 4 Mass. 163.— [£i>. ���In re Oabt. (DitMet Uourt, S. D. New York. Mareh 7, 1882.) �1. CONTEMPT— OFPICBBS, WHBN NOT CHAKOEABU!. �A sheriff or marshal, being indemnifled to levy on specifie property, shonld not be held chargeable with oontempt upon an injunction order of dubloug import of which he had no previous notice, and which referred to a judgment without date, and of different amount from that recited in liis execution. �2. Injunction— Notice to be Bbkved on Paeties Enjotned. �Parties and their attorneya, who are at all times accessible to service, should be properly served with notice of an injunction order if it be designed to bind them. �3. Bamb — Neoessitt of Personal Service. �The relaxation of the rule requiring Personal service of an Injunction in order to punish for contempt, extends no further than the exigencies of the case require to prevent a fallure of justice, and does not dispense with the necessity of service where the parties are easilj accessible. , . ' ��� �
