New York Court of Appeals February 27, 1900 (Krug v. . Pitass)

Vann, J.

The article in question, according to either translation, was libelous upon its face, because it charged the plaintiff with a want of professional ability and integrity and thus endangered the gain derived from his vocation.

(Cruikshank

v.

Gordon,

118 N. Y. 178;

Mattice

v.

Wilcox,

147 N. Y. 624; Flood on Libel & Slander, 114.