That the article complained of was libelous is not questioned.  The principal point made by the appellant in his brief  is that there was no proof that the article was  published by him,  and his argument is chiefly directed to the admission in evidence of Exhibit A, a copy of the newspaper containing this' article, of which newspaper appellant was said to be editor and publisher.  The  appellant claims that the copy of the paper was not sufficiently identified.  This becomes of no  importance  because there  is direct evidence from one of the typesetters of the paper that the defendant handed to him, to be set up in type, the article in question, and that the manuscript thus delivered to the witness  was in the handwriting of the defendant. This was a sufficient publication within the provisions of section 5 of Act No. 277.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed with the costs of this instance against the appellant.  So ordered.

Arellano, C, J., Torres, Johnson, Carson, and Tracey, JJ., concur.