Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1879-06-11
AuoE VS.. THE ENTERPRISE"
The Defendant Files its Answsr-I'
Takes N0shipg Bsek.

The Enterprise Publishing Company
has fled its answer to the complaint oil
Joseph F. Auds. claiming $50. 900 dam.
ages for libel and denies
First-That 1t published wrongfully
and maliciously the matter set out In
plaintiffs complaint, and AYERS that as .
matter Of public interest and concern
1t published an article containing among
others the words set forth in PLAINTIFF
complaint, and that such article ID
neither scandalous nor libslous, and
that plaintiff has not been damaged
thereby in any sum Whatsoever.
Sscond--Ths defendant for further an.
swering alleges that such article ~ q
whole IL true; that before the time OF Its
publication tho defendant Is informed
and believes and thersupon charges the
truth to be that said plaintiff, while en-.
ployed in the Bank Of Nevada, and In
charge OF sundry accounts. betwsen the
18th day OF November, 1877, and the
18th Of November, 1873. c~unningly and
fraudulently and by means OF fictitious
credits and debts and other entries by
him made, so falsi6ed such accounts
that thereby be became possessed OF the
sum OF Sl5,0 600. gold coin, and an appar'
ont credit Of $35, 900, which he used dur
ing such period in specializing In stocks 10
the name OF Francis l.. Auds ct said
bank and In his own name at other
banks and places; that said sum OF $16,-
600 has never been repaid and that
the plaintiff is now q defaulter to the
bank In that amount, that by reason OF
said credits and moneys, tho stock &C.
count and dealing Of said plaintiff In the
name OF Francis l.. Apde was In fraud
to said bank, increased to Q large
volume and was ut the time OF said pub.
LEGATION and Is now indebted to the bank
in the sum OF more than $50, 900. Then
follow allegations Of the taking OF the
800 shares OF Ophir stock without the
knowledge Of the bank, at such time Of
tho value OF So, 900 and causing the
sams to be sold and the proceeds
applied to his own use; that the defend.
ant was informed by those learned
In the law that such taking constituted
grand larceny; that the Grand Jury OF
Storey county 20 found and that plaintiff
wa thereupon tried; that while such
stock speculations wore going on said
plaintiff spent large sums OF money and
lived q "fast life" by a~ssociating with
lewd women, etc. /; that under such cir.
cumstances and under such advice the
defendant published said article, from
no malice toward the plaintiff. but from
A sense of responsibility IS Q consarvator
Of public morals. and that its uttsrance
was for good.
Third-That II plaintiff was not tech.
nicslly guilty Of crime in his acts and
doinRs as above set forth, hs had com.
mitted such gross irregularities In his
employment that Il was right and just
thst the same should be commented
upon by tho defendant a. q portion OF
the public press.
Fourth-Thst the defendant believed
it, publication to b true. and that the
sams was made for q good purpose and
as q warning to the youth Of the COM
munity.
Fiith-That the conduct Of plaintiff,
ss above set out in second defense, had
been commented ON publicly and before
said publication and currently reported
and was believed, and had been pub.
lishsd in the Chronicle a. and for the 70.
port Of an examining aud committing
magistrate.
Sixth-Ths answer also repeats and
reviews all and singular the statsmsnts
Of plaintiffs acts above set forth in the
second defense and will prove the same
on the trial.
Whitman & Wood are dsfsndants'
nounsa1