The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-03-22
LAW OF LIBEL.

As Laid Down in the County Court Hester-
day-some Fine Legal sparring-Colonei
Crawford's Irresistible Logic - Points
Made by the Prosecution-Steerlng In an
Unknown Sea-Judge BurlSe's Decision,
Etc, Etc.
The case of the State Of Texas VS.. j. z.
Smith, p. S. Pfouts, j. +. Elliott and W. l..
Hall, who were indicted by former grand
Jury, with having lbelled the jury in the
case OF the State VS.. X. L. Cowart, charged
with the murder of j. NJ. Thurmond, was
called in the county court yesterday, and
after an extended argument on the part OF
counsel, the indictment was quashed.
Messrs. Stemmons, Field, Seay and Assist,
ant County Attorney Marshall appeared
w. L, Crawford, l.. Il. Smith ana
w. T. Strange for the defense. The case
has attracted considerable attention ana
heen the subject of much gossip. Save one
or two, all OF the alleged slandered twelve
,urymen were present TO press the case.
The defense entered a motion TO quash
the indictment on the following GROUNDS;
First-That under the statutes criticism
of the acts of judicial and legislative bodies
does. not constitute libel unless charge OF
CORRUPTION is preferred.
Second-Ihe indictment is fatally defec-
tive in that IL fails to allege the manner in
which the libel was committed, whether by
written notice posted In some public place,
by publication in newspaper or otner-
Third-That the indictment overlooked
the fact that in the article upon which 1t
was based, no specific charges were made
against any Juror and also the fact that II
Itbe article) contained q qualifying clause
exempting the entire jury from the restric-
tons made.
Fourth-Tbat the indictment sought 70
make a single Juror james q. GarTin) the
object at which the assertions OF the hrticie
were levelled.
Other points were made in the able argu-
mems of the defense, which the re-
norter al this iuncture will not specify, but
suffice il TO say that battle royal ensued
between counsel on the points enumerated
above. a,
chosen words the formal reasons why the
indictment should not hold. He was fol-
lowed by Mr.. Robert Seay, who presented
in a terse manner the basis upon which the
Indictment rested, contending that The
objections Of the counsel on the other SIDE
did not affect the vitality OF the instrument
but rested uson trivial GROUNDS WINCH
recognized legal lights bad deemed intutn
Colonel w. L. Crawford then arose
and in an argument reple,s
with profundity and cogent iog'.
met every issue raised by ths
prosecution in manner that chai
lenged the admiration not only OF the lega
maternity, bot Of numerous throng. q
spectatOrs. Gradually warming 20 hi'
theme. the eloquent speaker passed on Y
an erposition OF the liberties accorded jour
nalism IN America, conclusively demon
strsfing The right Of this greatest OF tri0u.
nails 10 stand between the people ana ~
ofTjcers. Space f0rbids ertended mention
81 this effort. but a. q forensic episode y
rs Impressive and convincing.
The prosecution Was heard on new SUB
iecf-mnfter introduced BY the defense, anc
then Colonel Crawford summed up for The
Judge Burke. amer stating that
the Law Of libel vas one com
uarnffvely barren OF preceoent.
nd fhaf b hsd listened sftentirely 70 each
rids. I'D the defense had pierced 20 tne
rns-rou 81 the issue In their flrst reason ~
ouashine the Indictment, ana thai sccoro,
- ~ lie rfsfute referFd 20, BE mus
,--s-'t lie ru-fion. Thus ends a trlal Dot
1nir interesting % this immediate vicinity
hi TIE frs q lfs kind in ne staie 20 clearl1
Of NJ Tie preroRntiVss q the neEspaper q
the pnblicis exponent
~ rourf.s. Asthma nnd Throsf Disorders,
- R-1wr's Bronchial Troches. heFlnf