The daily gazette., 1880-12-03

before you what this man said. Now
they may meet it as they can.
Now the first point that strikes us
is this: Who wrote and published, or
who published, or who authorized
their publication? We are not bound
to show Croasdale wrote them. We
are not bound to show that Croasdale
knew who wrote them. We are only
bound under our declaration to show
10 you by preponderance of proof that
those articles went into that newspa-
per of which he is the editor in chief
with his knowledge and consent. 1t
is not necessary to fix the authorship
upon Croasdale; it is not necessary to
prove he handed them to anybody but
that they were in his paper, of which
he was the editor in chief; and the pre-
sumption lies very strongly that the
man who had control of the paper and
his subordinates under him in the edi-
torial department is not only respousi-
BILE for his own acts but for The acts of
his subordinates in that department
also. We are not bound to prove he
wrote them. Ifas editor, they went
in there with his consent, he publish
| vi bhO BOCl do ChlOOl Vi budtJ pdD6I-
and that is proved; he is editor of that
paper-they can't deny that. Croas-
dale wrote them, and if he had been a
man who had done meritorious act,
like man he would have said SO; he
would not be hiding behind the crimi-
nal laws of the State of Delaware
Either he did or did not. If he did
not write them, he knows who did,
Ii he did not write them he had per-
feet right to shut his lips tight by de-
clining TO answer. Do you remember
the by-play there? DO you remember
how earnest my friend Bates was to
inform him what his rights were? He
is as sharp and cutting as a razor; he
Yields the pen of a ready writer; he
has dipped it in the gall and he dashes
with vigor and vim over reams of pa
per; and not satisfied with that, he
has begun to use a printing machine
he cau't write fast enough. That
is what they proved about him. Did
he write themp will not waste time
on it. l believe there is not a jury
man in that box that has a doubt
about it in his mind, that Croasdale
wrote the articles. If he didn't, who
didp There are three men who wrote
editorials. They said there were other
parties, but questioned and cross
questioned, and got the entire staff
of the Every Evening Office here, and
nobody else in all that corps, nobody
else in all that Office from the man
whe distributes the proof among the
compositors to the other editors. Mr..
Humphrey, who occasionally sits with
him, and Mr.. Bell, who sits with him
good deal-nobody else knows any
thing about it. They cannot name
anybody else who did write il; nobody
else in all that company, who shuts
, his mouth when he is asked who did
write it9 Am l harsh on Mr.. Croas-
daleY
Ii it were manly act, if he were
standing up for public good; if he felt
thai he had done that which justice and
right had meriled at lis hands like an
honest man, and was not afraid to meet
his own offspring, wouldn't he have said
like man he did it? | say he wrote
them, and don't believe there is par
ticle of doubt that he wrote them. II
he didn't write them who permitted them
to go in that paper? There are only
Two men whom we know had any con-
troll of the supervision of editorial arti-
cles there ; nobody else named here,
some generalitles were used; "there
might have been some other person."
but nobody else is named. He Is edi-
tor-in-chief, and in his absence Mr.. Bell
tells YOU he supervised articles that went
INTO that paper-and they are all super
vised editorials. Now then Mr.. Bell
said he didn't write them be didn't
supervise them; he didn't know who
did. There is nobody left but Croas-
dale and he shuts his mouth. Who
supervised them? Why it is his paper,
he Haunted it in the face of the commu-
nity and in the face of these men for
TWO years and half or three years, and
when brought into Court of Justice
and confronted with them he is dumb.
No, gentlemen. l won't waste time OH
that pitiful plea, l leave it to my learned
friends to get out of the mud where
:, Croasdale has put them, and they are
wadng there neck deep, If not over thell
heads under the plea OF not guilty.
saw, who wrote them? Who published
, them? They were In his paper. Have
they given you living man who by any
, reasonable possibility could have done il
or would have done it? Haven't we
( shut this man as in a wise ? Yes; we
had him i'll wise, and we turned the
screw once or twice and we tried tC
make the mummy speak but speak he
would not. He plead his privilege under
the criminal laws of the State of Della
ware. | don't mean to be harsh Oh him
If say anything unkindly, it is because
feel intensely in earnest in this case
because | feel in my inmost soul thai
the man has attacked men just as homes
as walk this green earth, and who mear
no wrong, and who l believe did nc
wrong. just let me illustrate that poin
! before pass along.
Suppose Daniel Webster had been put
In a Court of Justice-"Mr. Webster
were YOU the author of that speech p
81 hide myself behind the criminal law,
of the United States" Would DAME
: Webster have said that? Yet wher
WIN. Croasdale is put on the witness
stand to speak of the meritorious work
= he has done to save this community
from plunder by a wretched corporation
} orpanized in fraud, conceived in fraud
r and living like vampire upon the live
. blood of our people, as hesclaimed, he
hid himself behind the criminal laws OF
= the State of Delaware! say, let them
take their defense and reconcile it il
r they may wish with honesty or manli'
ness.
| i