Daily Republican., 1880-05-25


(and they might possibly have sat
Croasdale ought TO have more of Il
should they Ss arrested for libslf Mr.
Bright had nothing to do with writing
the article, yet the plaintiff comes u
you and says that it will be proveI
that Mr.. Bright wrote it. but their owl
witness has said that Mr.. Bright die
not sign II or authorize any one else Il
do such a thing. They admit the proc
that he was connected with the writing
of It, was indirect, merely from tn
words 1--WE" and "our," which appear
ed in the article, which implied tina
more than one perssn was concerned.
Hereupon Mr.. Lore cited a number o
cases where editors and correspondent
used the words eve" and "our but tn
singular number was meant. Strang'
to say, said he, the very able editor o
the " Every Evening" used the worc
.'we," but then that only was a mo
dest way Of using the selfish word a.
Mr.. Bates had said I" you ought to re-
member the petition for non-suit.
There was not a scintilla of evidenc
which could connect Mr.. Bright with tn
article.
Mr.. Bird hath said "if VIM. Brigh
had said that he did not authorize
Mr. Tantum to sign the article the mat
ter would have been erded." If Mr.
Bright had said so 1t would have beer
in his own interest, but DR.. Tantun
said Mr.. Bright did not sign it, which
was against the DOCTORS interest.
Still addressing the Jurors, Mr.. Batei
said: 1fyou were placed in $4,000
bail early in the morning, like Mr.
Bright had been, would you have off
cred an explanation, or would you no
have said young man you have leaped
in the dark and must abide by the
consequences? Yet is there any evi
dence that Mr.. Bright wrote the article
or authorised any ene to do so? You
must not infer that he did, you mus'
bs positive. The plaintiff inters only
from The expression "a good thing
They have not proved anything against
MIR. Bright but against themselves
and run themselves completely oRt o
Court.
If this case could be reversed, it, NJ
doubt, would be shown that Mr.. Bright
should be awarded damages. II was
undoubtedly the poor man after the
rich. First, he wanted fve thousand
dollars, but now this modest young
man wants twenty thousand dollars
What does he want it for? AS salvt
to his wounds. Because he was an edi'
tor he should not be awarded such
large damages. In enlarging his scope
you should see that he wields his pen
in q proper manner. Let an editor
stand as a pure man. In conclusion
he asked for a verdict for the defend.
ant"
In addressing the Jury Mr.. Whiteley
said: 'In granting even six cents
damages it must be proven that the
article was written or compos-
ed by the defendant, yet Mr.. Bright
did not write, sign or take the article
to the publisher. He said that he re-,
GREETED that Tant1m wrote 1t; but the
defendants counsel say that he should
have run down and disavowed it, but
when he was arrested he said (and ]
glory in his spunk) you have
arrested me without a chance for
and now you can do your
best to obtain damages. He referred
to one Of the lawyers saying Mr.. Bright
and DR.. Tantum sat upon the doctor
front door steps and talked over the
matter. but men in DR.. Tantum's state
Of health do no! generally sit on door
steps in the latter part of November.-
He considered the whole case was on
presumption. Tantum who is code.
fendant hath said Massrs. Wood, Haw.
kins nor Bright had anything 10 dc
with the matter. He merely said did
it, and l give him credit, for he did not
want any one TO bear the effects of his
sin. You must not consider Whist Haw-
kins, wood or Tantum did, bat what
Mr.. Bright did-which was nothing.
The defence has cross-questioned DR..
Tantum for an hour and still they are
not satisfied, but when you jurors will
come down they will be less satisfied.
When Mr. Bright said 1t was a good
piece he did not mean to tell DR.. Tan
tum to publish it, or to sign his name
to II, it was merely phrase, aud the
utterance did not prove that Mr.. Bright
had any connection with the aoticle
DR.. Tantum did not write the article in
cold blood, but did it in reply to the
repeated attacks of the editor Of the
"Every Evening"" He who expects to
keep his escutcheon clear in regard tc
libel should not libel others. III viii,
fy member Of the jury and ne re.
torts aud l should bring a lawsuit
against him l should bs whistled out
Of court, and yet the defendant comes
here for $4,000 damages.
Mr.. Bright knew that the defendant
could not get any damages; it might
have been better il he had admitted he
did publish the article, but there
was nothing legal to compel him to do
30. Did he recogaize, assent to or
brag about the publication? Nay, he
was given scarcely enough time to
think. The plaintiff said that Court
met the morning the defendant was ar
rested and they did not have time to
defer his arrest, but, said Mr.. White
ley, Court meets every six months, and
couldn't they have awaited short
time for the $4,000.
Mr.. Bright regretted the publication:
he said go after he had been arrested,
and that was all he was bound to do.
Hs believed from Mr.. Bright's character
that if the plaintiff had gone to him
he would have offered an explanation,
but, "a worm If trod upon will turn"
Since MIR. Croasdale is not so much
respected as a man but merely as an
EDITOR, the damages should be lessened