New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1856-05-19
't&.. JACOB NJ Nlnler .L
ES. .es- Fourth Datrlct Court.

Now W. h INTO His Honorable Court t
Nixon adams the dssaants herein and deny all
cept as may be hereinafter specially admitted. ,,i
Of he artass set forth psns Petition but they deny
The bsiou and false and mn 1, from motives Of
that they were made and published By
pa es . ~
Claims to their suagss or oe that the
sary welfare Of the people and Government and h" all
that was published was true , -
deredn favor with costs and for ali further and
s4A''s's' DuRANr HoREoR, Defendants Attorneys
The following gentlemen sworn in as the Jury in the
Howard, Thomas G. Bell william Price, j. T. Hart James L.
obde c. Laurenz, Henry Hodges, ?. Marae, and A W.
The y reading h clients petit
MI H. Duan stated TINT extracts read of them
ne 5 M s s been
have insist There being no and That the ar
sop IN os eosaSn Bgh Winer
Court ruled that the aTicls IN question be read entire in
stated that they wond close their with
excepting those Witnesses that might be called for
Floyd the witness alluded TO- i then salsd
a 49, he Dsmaeras e"add FOR Recorder
First District Remembered reading certain articles the
viii The defendant Nixon known the defendant
sae o se e H.
Adams the propeors, from seeing their names at the
Gross EsanIasd Witness member Of the Democratic
'hs Una ONCE
being asked f he took active Pari The election
the testimony Tor ths prosecution,
he heavy dmges claimed by slIesa # pscanis5y
lie Journalists inquire The character and antecedents Of
sh duty q public press exalniDe The presn
yodp Ct pSos @ the IT, 5
fSf Rsn 5 @ hs sss
lie had better have called down upon his
who puts himself for Office must be inquired about his posi-
fng has lie aim s IS only BY the
scrutiny that candidates real character DO
expressions drop heated they sFibued L
ha his clients hSd transcended the line their right
duly P9Ss journalists to the and G
clients - ~''s'>''',, : -
for the defence was then
X y: Hatssn, Has resided IN the city perma
Captain Of Police Witness being asked if he had an
IL Ss' sapts s charges s. til
plaintiff vague an general in their md that
cssdinss % charges psciacay had Been Of no a1a
the Se ak and re-
A buttns testimony. =
Iishsd painti had already public once aud had show
70 b The dssHda1s Published this, and
PENDANTS what those charges based upon This
thought rather extraordinary Mr. hers read The article
astng Bright and Winter and asserted that charges cou
be palmer more specific He desired 10 show the Jury
pBu; whilst In office, had done things which in all up
rsh minds would dquslfy him from holding office again
aud when the matter comes 70 tea the plaintiff does
but seeks exclude the evidence The defsnc
had said that plaintiff fathess and corrupt III ONCE
d they would Proreit.
Mr. Lacey argued the yagueness OF 6eendan charges
the nnness their desire prove pechs facts in support
charges that specific claimed thai the hR
been bonght forward into cloud of darkness not being
pared 10 rebu what the defence might wish prove etc.
The Court rasd that the defyndans charges
specific and ordered the examination TO proceed The
ton thereupon took exception the testimony OF Mr. Wa
as they subsequently, did in reference 10 severed oS wi
I, ueSaes.
Mr.. Raso-on the lat Of March, 1885, witnsss called