The evening light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1881-1883, 1883-02-24
THE EXPRESS LIBEL SUIT.
What was Asserted i'm the Alleged Libel
and What Mr.. Copeland says
I'm RanlN tn LII.

and What Mr.. Copeland says
i'm Reply to 1t.
The following is the Express editorial of the
9TH of January, upon which Mr.. Copeland bases
his claim for damages
"As Mr.. Copeland is a candidate for Mayor,
and as that officer has the general management
of our finances il is a legitimate question for
the people to ask how he has managed the
affairs of others heretofore placed in his hands.
We know very little of such transactions,
| give some valuable hints TO the voters. We
| will state the facts, allowing the reader to make
| his own comment In 1881 Il. ?. Aipen died, and
Mr.. Copeland was appointed administrator of
his little estate, the total valuation OF winch
was S2,597 80. The administration was closed
| November %, and the report shows total eX-
penSe of administering on the estate of S2519 30
| to have been $3.50 %, and the administrator
was allowed to retain the balance of the estate
| Sl6Ti t., subject TO the order and instructions
of the heirs. What such retention cost the
heirs do not know, but from the charges FOR
administration, it was doubtless pretty heavy
| sum. The heirs, no doubt, were afraid to give
any instructions through fear that the balance
| of the estate would not pay the fees accruing
for the care of the money left in the admins
traitors hands.
To this article, Mr.. Copeland's petition replies
that the words and language mean that the said
John II. Copeland was dishonest and embczzled
the funds of said estate, and, further, that he
had made false and eXtOrtiOnate charges,
and had committed frauds against the heirs of
said estate and had Illegally, fraudulently and
feloniOusly withheld the proceeds from the
legal heirs, apprOpriating the same to his own
use and benefit.
1.-The administrator Cmeaning the admins
tration of the estate of +. W. Alpin, deceased,
of which plaintiff was administrator was closed
November %, and the report shows total eN-
pense of administering on the estate of S25,9 10
to have been 1922 %, and the administrator
was allowed TO retain the balance of the estate,
Sl6I7 e. subject to the order and instruction OF
the heirs"
The plaintiff would show and allege that, in
fact, the total expense of administration did
not exceed $3.50 instead of SSS2 as falsely al
legged.
The plaintiff would further show that he was
not, as the administrators, allowed to retain
the balance of the estate, Sl,6II 62, subject to
the order and instructions of the heirs as
falsely alleged therein but in truth. the bal
ance of said estate amounting TO Sl,6I9.2 was
by order of the court paid over TO said plalntif,
whO..was the authorized agent and attorney of
the said heirs, authorized to receive the same.
The article then procee dis to state:
What such retention cost the heirs we do |
not know, but from the charges of adminstra-
ton it was doubtless pretty heavy sum -
meaning to charge the plaintiff with the unaw |
full dishonest and fraudulent appropriation of |
the aforesaid balance OF said estate.
THE heirs no doubt, were afraid to give in |
structions through fear the balance of the said |
estate would not pay the fees for the care of |
the money left in the administrators hands
meaning thereby that in addition to consuming |
the estate under his control in false, fraudulent |
and dishonest charges; that this plaintiff had |
the heirs entitled to receive the estate and they
were thereby intimidated from making their |
claims whereas the said heirs having full |
of every act done by this plaintiff as |
of the said estate had expressed |
to this plaintiff in writing their entire satisfac-
ton and appreciation in regard TO his said acts,
having the fullest confidence in the honesty
and integrity of this plaintiff
The petition then states that the plaintiff has |
asked the editor of the Express for the name
of the author of the alleged libel, which has be
denied to him and concludes by stating that the
plaintiff alleges that by means and reason of
the publishing of the aforesaid false, wicked,
malicious and defametOry libel by the said de-
PENDANT he is greatly prcjudiced, degraded and
injured in his good name, fame, credit and
reputation, and is held up to public inlamy, dis
grace contempt and hatred and that divers
good and worthy citizens, to whom the integ-
rity of the plaintiff, in the premises, were un.
known have on occasion of the circulation of the
said libel, refused, and still do daily re-
fuse to have any business with the plaintiff
and that by means of the circulation of the Ii
bel, the plaintiff has been greatly disturbed in
his feelings, and has suffered great anxiety and |
distress of mind, and has been injured and
preiudced in many other respects, to the plain
tifs great damage in the sum of $1,000.