Daily Republican., 1880-11-26
rHELlBELs SUIT.
Delaware state fire saa Marine
Insurance COMPANY vs. william
r. .Or0ssdaio-some Cautious Tos-


: timoBy-EvIdenee NJ 10 Damages
, Specially Repcrted for the REPuBLIoAS.
NEw CAyrLs, Nov. 24.-At the con
clusion Of the Court report In Wednes
days RspUBLIoAS the taking oforra
testiu .ony had comm enced In the libe
oasp OF the Delaware State Mutual Fir
d MArins Insurance Company, vs.. VII
liam T. CroA d.le. -.ta. .s.
NOT RsaUIsBD TO cRINEArs HIMSELF.
Mr.. Crossdals was the first witnesi
called by the plaintiff and Mr.. Lore ask
ed him II he had brought with him the
. als Of Every Evening for the years
lit, '78, '79 and 80 as he had been
subpoenaed 70 do. Counsel for the dc.
Tense objected on the following grounds:
First, that q subpoena deucss tecam was
not the proper mole Of procedure
by which to require the defendant to
produce the files. Second, that the
files Of newspaper are not what the
law oontsmplstes a. private writings.
Third, that under the law Mr.. Creas-
dale cannot be required to say or do
any thing tending to criminats himself.
| TheJe points the Court sustained,
and Mr.. Croasdale was allowed 10 leave
the witness stand.
WHO wRoTR THE LIBEL
| Jerome B. Bell, managing editor Of
the Every Rye aing, was next called and
testified that he had been employed
upon the paper during the years 1877,
rs, '79 and SO and during that time
Mr.. Croasdsle was editor-in.chief. 90.
oasionally the witness prepared editor.
ials as did also tie city Editor. Witness
was shown copy Of Rvery Evening Of
December IL, 1878, containing one Of
the alleged libslous publications, but
sail he did not know who wrote the
article In question, or by whose author.
ity 1t was published. He, however
said that Mr.. Croasdals had general
charge ef tho whole paper. Copies Of
Every Evening we're shown the witness
OF January 8, 1879, and February rs,
1879. The editorial in the issue OF
February rs, attacking the insurance
company, was partially pointed out,
but the witness could not say whether
Mr.. Croasdals wrote It and did mot
know Of 1t having been written by any
one else. Hs repeated the statement
that Mr.. Crossdals had charge Of all
that appe .red In the paper except
when out Of town. Witness did not
know what the circulation of Every
Rveoing was, although questioned at
great length, by Mr.. Lore.
Under cross examination Mr.. Bell
said that Mr.. Croasdale lad often been
out Of town for while at time, dur
ing which time he (the witness) had
charge Of the paper. He could net say |
that he was thus absent when any OF
the alleged libelous articles were pub
lished. 1t was frequent that editorial
matter went into the paper which the
defendant did not see until the paper
went to press.
Re. .dired-None OF the articles In |
4. 'uestiOn went into the paper, to the
be. of my knowledge, without the de-
feudANnt seeing them. cauDtt Say
that he was ont OF town when any Of
them yers published,
PRESS ROOM SECRET.
George W. Humphrey, city editor of
the Every Evening, swtrn-l have
been employed upon the EN cry Even
ing sincs November, 1877, anti was city |
editor during 1879. Like the preceding |
witness, Mr.. Humphrey knew nothing |
Of the circulation of the paper, 2nd
emily knew Of 1t circulating in New |
Castle and Wilmington he had
bought 1t in the former place, and he
had seen 1t upon the streets Of Will
mington. About three editions Of the
paper were printed each day. He did
not know how many copies Of each edi-
tIon we're printed, and only saw part Of
an edition run of occasionally. OF his
own knowledge he knew nothing as to
the number OF copies circulated.
Do you remember q controversy be-
tween the REPUBLICAN, and Every Rve-
ming about the respective circulation of
the two papersi" asked Mr.. Lore final
ly.
%ESs, x d." va, III. claim mad. BY ts.
Every Evening at that timer" Ii
Mr.. Bates, for the defense, objected,
but the court said the question was
proper one and directed the witness to
answer. The question was then re.
peated.
"Ths Every Evening"" said the wit.
ness, "claimed to have as large cirou-
lation as TIE RBPUBLtoAs."
"And what did the REPUBLICAN claim
as Its ciroulationl''
81 think about 5000 copies."
"When did the controversy take
placer" /,
"In 1875"
GLOW did the circulation at that
time compare with that OF the Preced-
ing Year,
81 have no knowledge on that )
point" III
"Does the length Of time consumed
in striking Of the edition now vary any !,
from that consumed In 1878. j..
~ do rot know"
The witness also testified to the fact
that Mr.. CrcoIdsle was the responsible !,
editor OF the paper, bat when question !
cd as to who wrote the articles in ques- !,
tion, he replied that he had no know =
ledge on that point.
COutt then adjoarned until 8 O'Clock. y y
AFTERNOON SESSION. I
Court re assembled at 8 o'clock, and 4
the trial OF the case OF the Della. State Il
Mutual Fire & Marine Insurance Co. L
VS.. William T. Croasdale was renewed. q
THE FlLEs PRODUCED AT LAST. II