Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-02-08
Hon. AlOnzO Bell VS.. Wessrs. Ha1kman
and Reed

THE SUNDAY CHRONICLE SUIT.
Hon. AlOnzo Bell VS.. Messrs. Haekman
and Reed.
PROCEEDINGS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT TO-DAY.
The trial OF MessrS Benz. F. Hackman and Henry
Reed, indicted for criminal libel 'on Hon Alonzo
Bell Assistant Secretary OF the Interior, was taken
up to-day, Assistant District Attorney Taggart for
the government and Hon. John Goode and Thomas
r. MI iler Tor the defendants. The publication, the
basis of the charge, was published in the Sundav
Chronicle of April 30th, 1882 OF which Hackman is
the publisher and Reed the editor, and was headed,
person 1t will do to watch" and intimated that
Mr. Bell knew OF corruption and abuses in the In
terror department and took no steps to correct
them.
Argument Of Hon. John (1oOde.
The publication was admitted, and Mr.. Goode
argued that the article was not nbelous or that
any injury was intended to Mr. Bell, but that it
legitimate comment on the ofYicial conduct OF a
government officer and that there criminality
charged against Mr. Bell. II there was any libel In
the article 1t directed against Hon. Carl Schurz
the Secretary, and Mr.. Williamson, commissioner
OF the Land Office. 1t simply charged thai Mr..
Bell was not SO careful and watchfui as ne should
have been. The jury must ascertain what was
their Intention II this was libel then no man is
SAFE, ana every newspaper man would have to have
an attorney at his elbow to tell him how far he
could SO.
THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
was the bulwark OF liberty, and could not be
"ohAuSSu " SoilSlCSS, luC SOuStlGutlOu
1t. This publication was a privileged one and II
tnere was malice the government could show it.
III a newspaper man. in the line OF his duty, pub
lished an article commenting on the conduct OF an
official he had the right, and it was privilege he
enjoyed, and unless there was hidden malice which
the prosecution must bring out and Show-a crimi-
verdict OF guilty would break down the freedom of
the press, and the boasted freedom would become q
sham and delusion. They would have to have
PRESS CENSORSHIP,
where the writer would have to dance, with hat In
hand. attendance on the censor, who would say
what should and what should not be published.
There had been such censorship. but, thank God.
1t had not been here, but in England; and it had
been removed there. He hoped that the power OF
the press would continue, SO long was pure and
true teachings emanated therefrom. He had no
word to say In favor Of calumniatOr; a man who
would use his paper to inure and disgrace person,
and he was not the apOlogtst OF the calumniatOr
and Vilier. but he denied that the defendants were
SUCH They We're law abiding citizens and did not
article as an honest comment on the acts OF public
o1lcer, and there was no malice in it.
The Question of Malice.
Mr. Taggart said that If the court held that edi-
tors could write and publish what they pleased re-
fecting upon Official characters then they should 90
no further.
The court said that no prosecution could be main-
tained unless the libel was from malicious motives
MT Miller said that the article was no more than
acriticlSm on official conduct, and, that being the
The court asked for a reading of the article and
Mr. Miller having read it. the court remarked that is
palpabe libel II it was for malicious motives The
case should proceed and the jury decide II 1t was
published for improper motives. AS it stood 1t was
tagrant libel.
THE TESTIMONY.
The government called Mr. James F. Hood chief
OF the appointment division of the Interior depart
ment, who testified to Mr.. Bell having been Assis-
tant Secretary. the books showing he was such
from April 10th, 1877, to August 1st. 1882 Mr..
SchurZ was Secretary from March l2th, 1877, to
March 9TH, 1881. MIR. Williamson was commits
slOner OF the land Office from June 21th. 1876. to
June %. 1881. Mr. Teller became Secretary April
18Th: 1852 Mr. Bell was before the time mentioned
Mr. Samuel Polkinhorn testified to having sold
the Chronicle containing the article and identified
the one produced
MR. BELLS TESTIMONY.
Mr.. Bell took the stand and testified that he
bought paper OF the issue containing the article
from newsboy, at his residence on street.
Witness was eighteen months in the department
before he was appointed assistant secretary. Had
had business relations with q person claiming to
represent the paper.
STATEMENT OF MR.. HACKMAE.
The defendant, Mr.. Hackman, testified that the
article was written by Mr.. Reed, and it met with
witness APPROVAL the whole intent was the public
good, and there was no malice for he did NOT know
Bell and never met him till this suit. It was lust
such an article as he would permit as to any pub
lie officer II he had reasonable grounds to believe
Mr.. 1eller's attention to real supposed abuses,
and he thought that, as Mr. Bells resignation was
requested soon afterwards, there was some
ground for the charges which had been made.
Cross eXamined Witness had read much OF gross
Irregularities in the department. particularly In the
land Office and thought that there was reasona be
ground for such an article; he did not know that
Mr.. Williamson had. become Opulent; he did not
know what ''1agrant public abuses were alluded
TO.
Redirect: He relied on Mr.. Reed who was his
senior; the only motive was to call attention to the
supposed abuses there.
Re-cross: An article in the same paper calling
Secretary, TelleEs attention to barnacles was
read, and Mr.. Hackman said Mr. Bell was one OF
the parties referred to-
TESTIMONY OF EDITOR REED.
Mr.. Henry Reed testified that he was editor OF the
Cincinnati Commercial In 1851; was with the SIR,
day Chronicle at the time of the publication. Mr.
Reed said that net only by paragraphs setting forth
loOSeneSS, but by private Information, he came tO
the conclusion. as had many Others, that affairs In
some OF the bureaus OF the department Cthe Indian
Office, &c.) We're not conducted strictly according
to law and justice. He knew Mr. Teller very we'll
and wishing that his administration should be q
success he had interested himself to the Interior
department The course OF Mr. Bell had been very
freely commented upon and. acting on his informa-
ton, he wrote the article. He did not suppose II
was proper here to state what was his Information
as to corruption in the Land Office.
The Court.-lf you know OF anything criminal
affecting that Office you may state it.
Mr.. Reed said that he had not been in the Land
Office, but his information was through letters and
OutSue lie nau leUueF IN dis pocket calling atten-
tion to number OF abuses under Mr.. Williamson
which was from thoroughly reliable source
There were charges then, In credible, conscientious
newspapers, for there were some such. There was
a strong demand on the newspaper for prudence
(The COurt.-Necessity for prudence) Yes, sir
necessity. In witness experience for half q CEN
tury he had endeavored to be prudent, and sup.
posed he was prudent in this matter for he had nc
malice, and he simply wrote the article for the
public good.
On SS-examination Mr.. Taggart asked the wit
ness whom he had In mind when he wrote the
article, and referred to certain persons becoming
illegtimately upulent The witness said he did not
propose to supply the deficiencies OF the
Indictment, but being required to answer the
question, said he had no particular person
| In view. The corrupt transactions to which he
referred related to land Office transactions In the
| northwest and in the great interior; he could not
remember specific facts, but remembered impreS-
siOnS When asked about his knowledge as to the
wealth OF Mr. Williamson, he said he had never In
quired into his income or his possessions; he be-
lleved Jay Gould and Mr.. Vanderbilt were rich
edge; his belief concerning Mr.. Williamson was
based on the same grOunds-public report.
|. "And sometimes said Mr.. TagKart. ssunsO-
phisticated creditors believe such reports to their
disadvantages"
81 suppose So" said the witness, "some of mine
have"
OTHER TESTIMONY.
John B. Mccarthy, who was formerly an employe
OF the Chronicle, and is now connected with the
Baltimore Sun and San Francisco Chronicle testi-
fed to the good reputation OF the defendants
a. Darby, job printer; j. Y. Potts, OF the Evening
Critic, and H. P. Goodwin gave similar testimony.
Judge Wylie's Views As to the Law.