Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1866-06-22
LOCAL NEWS.

TIE OLEPHANR LIBEL CASE. CrRcu1r
Court, Judge Oiin. - This morning, on the
opening OF the Court, Mr.. Riddle, for the de-
PENDANT, in the libel case Of McGihan agt. Gle.
plane, continued his argument, contending
that the defendant acted as an American citi.
zen, not as an informer, as used in common
parlance. The friends of Mr.. Lincoln argued
that those opposing the Administrator were
IN the interest OF the rebels; and on the other
hand, many Of the opponents Of Mr. Lincoln
held that the Government was in the interest
OF fanatics. They Were both honest IN their
opinions. He proceeded to argue that Gle.
phane was, under the circumstances, iusti-
nAble in writing the letter referred TO, and that
he had no malice; but, on the other hand, wrote
IL in good faith, a. had been testified to by the
defense, and the plaintiff himself, ON the stand.
testified that he believed that il was written in
good faith.
Mr.. Bradley, for the plaintiff, closed he ar.
gument, and proceeded 70 speak of the defense,
asserting il the principles were declared to be
the law OF the land, II would be more severe
blow to public liberty than q great battle
he enaangers freedom and becomes a slave,
scarcely free TO act or think for himself. This
thing Of subornation 70 party leads to corrup.
as he does, and he obtains an impression Of
his standing, must he go to the Government
secretly ana inform on him The object was
to build up their party. MT. Bradley pro-
that the letter was written by the defendant
without any such foundation as good citizens
should want. resu -H -.. -.
The principle of law was that communica.
tons to be privileged must be made with pro.
bable cause and for the public good. but such,
when the object Of the communication il to
benefit the party or q third person, do not come
hs had no9 70. ,ns
OF the letter, supplying the want Of the origi-
nal; and then too they put in the affidavit Of
Assistant Secretary Of War, Dana, in which he
states that in November, 1864, he received a
lnftA ~ ha nh ntnv raj Nc
Clephane himself testified thar he had q copy.
The letter was acted on by the Department on
the same day 1t was named. The letter was
written for the purpose OF having the work
taken from McGhan-
The line of defense is that Mr.. Clephane
was one of the members Of q secret voluntary
association, OF which the counsel on the other
side, (Mr. Cook who says he does not get rec
held meetings for the purpose Of hearing the
reports Of the members--not what tney nao
ascertained themselves, bat the talk o. Tom,
Dick and Harry. Mr.. Brown teeoned taat ne
anthorized 20 report cases 70 the va Depart-
ment; but Mr. Clephsne sssumed that power.
Did he inquire rs to the loyalty OF 1c0hAl
and that Mc(Shan Was Offering to be1 On
Mcclellan. This last consuteseo tne c9snse
Of McGhan-the secret commattec did NOT
sslisvs him disloya! ~ mn; ~; Ias etsnd cad
n those days comnisstons were appointed
= SIthcrify, Of law to ascertain who
mt shey did not oct like this secret COMMITTEES
Here they denounced man who had offered
his liz 3br htg country. They say II was All
go, 1ecause Il would bring another man to
sSTposs the Administration. The object Was
to deprive Me0han Of employment, and they
charged that he was disloyal, bat they have
Seneeded that this charge Of disloysity vas
Mise "a HiaA SO 80 lsf0 - =
: Mr. Bradley argued that Mr.. McGhan BE-.
ing q candidate for The Councils in 1884 his
Loyalty Or disloyalty must have been known
% this secret committee, and did he not by BE-
coming . candidate challenge an tnvesfaea
and acting for hfu,self, made this charge g.
eretiy Did he believe WAtsoay n be did.
and had not informed the 6overnmeat ofthe
words Of coodsnaattoa saGActsstiy stroag Tor
him. The defense havs srgued that Il was ~