New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-02-02
THE HART-7OWNSEND SUIT.
ALL THE EVIDENCE PUT IN.

THE CASE TO BE SUMMED UP on MoNDAY-Howr
4 HUMIEL's LETTER TO ROBERTS.
When the Hart Townsend libel case was
called yesterday morning in the Supreme Court before
Judge Van Worst every seat taken. There were q
large number OF newspaper men present. and In the audi
ence werc some wellknown theatrical people and
police officials. Mr. Evarts began the pro
ceedings by making extracts from Truth containing
vicious attacks George Alfred Townsend and then read
the complaint In the OF Eugene j. Post against the
Local Publishing Company OF Stamford, Conn, the pub
fishers Of Truth In which IL is charged that Hart and
others conspired issue stock OF tho company Illegally
In the complaint Hart is claimed to be insovent
Charles W. Fuller was the first witness. He testified
that OH March 10, 1881, Truth published totally unjus
fed attack on him. The article was read and
the witness characterized 1t as blasphemous and
obscene. 1t was written IN the style OF the
Song of Solomon. He saw Mr.. Hancock who was then
managing editor OF TRUTH in relation to the publication,
and was referred to Howe q Humme. He asked to see
Mr. Howe and was told he had lost his wife. Within
week he again called at Howes Office and was informed
that Howe was his bridal tour. He procured an n
dctment against Hart and Others but the case was not
tried fetraction OF the libel published In Truth on
September 2, 1881.
whitelaw Reid testified that he had known George
Alfred Townsend for fifteen sixteen years. and that hs
standing as Journalist was good.
"what is the general character OF Mr.. TownSendl"
asked John ID. Townsend. The question was OBJ
eoed excluded the ground that the defendans
general character not in controversy. An exception
taken.
Isaac " Gregory managing editor OF The Graphic, was
called but not taken, similar grounds
John D. Townsend said he prepared to call several
other gentlemen to testify to the general character of his
client but to he would simply take exception
in their to the ruling OF the court The case for tho
defence was then rested.
fhn cd m in al
He testified that a large part OF the information
on which the articles attacking General Garfield
az bribe-taker and peEurer based taken from
the campaign Text Book furnished by the Democratic
National Committee. lie denied that he ever toll the
witness Ryan, that would attack the Manhattan Beach
ComIany on the sewerage question. He said that he
made investments in mining stocks the advice and at
the instance OF George d. Roberts and lost in every in
stance lost altogether between $4,000 and $4,000
II was in consequence OF this loss that a suit was
threatened against Roberts He also testified In regard
to the Kirkland House register and the circulation OF
Truth On the cross-examination Mr. Hart said that
Howe and Humme appeared for him in the Post suit
He had not sworn to any answer IN that suit.
Q.-Why did you make attacks on Mr.. Roberts after
you had los. money in mining stocksi A.-Because
found out the character Of the man.
Q.-why did you not get Judgment against hint A
thought to lose the money and expose him. and
thus prevent him from fleeing the public any further
Roberts A-No sir
Hart further testified that Mr. seover was be brought
In in the conspiracy proceedings. The envelope in which
the mOneyetter him handed 10 the witness,
and he 10 the jury the changes which had been made in
1t from the time he first received it.
Anthony Comstock testified that he had known Joseph
Hart for about two years and considered his personal
character good Truth had attacked him (COmstock and
he demanded reparation, which was made. On the
examination, Mr. Townsend read some bitter and
scuriiOus attacks on Mr.. Comstock from Truth. In
spectOr Bynes and a number OF other Witnesses
testified the general good character of the plaintiff
David Carvalho explained the work Of the experts IN
determining that the envelope in which the money letter
TO Hart fraudulent and that the name Wnleh
had been the envelope originally had been erased and
that OF MOrey substituted
Chief Justice Noah Davis was the first witness called
after the He testified that the MOrey letter and
Kirkland register had been put IN evidence in the
trial before him and identified them.
Term OF the court which yOu are Presiding Justice
for the disbarment Of William f. Howe y asked Mr..
The question was objected to and ruled out.
w. d. Henry of The Herald, after testifying to Harris
thought Of the attacks Of TruH on The Herald and Mr.
Bennett and would not say whether or not he considered
truth Enlightened paper" He thought 10 would injuFe
him with his paper to answer the questions.
b. G.. Jayne testified that he employed by Hart 10
ferret out the truth OF the Morey letter business.
Did ne tel you that the thing orenated with the
mo, L first told him that thought 1t came from
Hart told the witness in November $780, that the pub
caon of the MOrey letter had injured the circulation Of
the paper
James T. Clark cashier OF Truth denied that he told the
witness Elliot that unless Warner and CO.'S advertisement
was renewed, Truth would attack that firm
lanes w Pratt, managing editor OF Truth, denied
George D. Robertss statement that be had told Roberts
that Hart Truth would attack him if he did not pay
back the money lost by Hart in mining speculationH.
We rest, said Ar. NewcOmbe.
That's case" responded Mr.. Townsend.
After consultation with the jury Judge Van Worst adj
0urneG the until Monday morning. when the cOun-
sci VIII sum up aud the case will DO given TO the
jury.
The following IS the fl text OF the letter sent by Howe
& Hummel 20 George d. Roberts, which was put in evil
den0e Thursday;
LAW OFFICE OF HOWE & HUlnfEI,
81 and SO Centre and 1876, 13S, aud 14O Leonard
sts., New-YOrk City.
William T. Howe. Abe II. Hummel
Jan. 90 1882.
GEORGE ID. ROBERTS, Tsq.
SIR We sent your office to request you to call
word left to that eject, but nasmuch you,
have not responded We respectfully notify You that we