
    Thomas against Croswell.
    ALBANY,
    August, 1809.
    A special jury will not bs granted, in an action for a libel against a person, who is a public officer», unless the libel relates to his o/jicial conducts See a?ite9 'Thomas ve Itumseu,
    J. RUSSEL, for the plaintiff,
    moved for a special jury in this cause. He read an affidavit, stating, that the action is brought against the defendant, for publishing a false, and scandalous libel, of and concerning the plaintiff, being one of the representatives of the state of New-York, in the congress of the United States, and a major-general, in the militia of the state.
    Foot, contra.
   Per Curiam.

In the cases of Spencer v. Sampson, and Foot v. Croswell, (1 Caines, 489.) Livingston v. Cheetham, (1 Johns. Rep. 61.) and Van Vechten v. Hopkins, (2 Johns. Rep. 373.) the rule was settled, that unless it appears, that the plaintiff was libelled for his official conduct, in some important public trust, we will not grant a special jury; In the present case, though the plaintiff was at the time, a representative in congress, and major-general of the militia of the state, yet it does not appear that he was libelled for any conduct in either of those official characters.

The motion must, therefore, be denied.

Rule refused.  