Morning journal and courier., 1886-07-16

MT. Alling-Did you belong to the Typo graphical union! Witness-Yes.
 MT. Alling-In March and April of this | years Witness-Yes.
 MT. Alling-Are you still member! Wit ness-No; not since March 19.
 Who was in your employ from March 18th | to April 5. Frederick Grannis and Robert | G. Larkins two press feeders.
 Mr. AIling-Did anyone use your office to do printing in between time otherwise than you know4 Witness-No sir.
 MT. Alling-Do you keep books or blot ter, and if so, will you produce 1t in courtt Witness-I do keep blotter and will pro- duce it.
 MT. Alling-Did Glidden have any work done at your office between those periodsi Witness-I don't know that he did.
 Constable H. J. BIakeman of Bunnell's museum was then called to the stand. He testified that he once boarded with Glidden and saw him Saturday night, June 5, dis tributing the boycotting circulars near the corner of Chapel and State streets.
 Mr. E. w. Baldwin, bookkeeper for the Darlington Publishing company, and for over two years stockholder in said comPa- ny, was the next witness. He said: was in the office on the night after the meeting of the Typographical union when McNamara, Glidden and Mailhouse came in and McNa- mara said they wanted the letter reconsid- cred. Mr. Darlington replied he wouldn't do this, but would give them the final an swer the next morning at 10 o'clock. They spoke of the price of the boycott and that 1t Mr. Alling-Did they say anything about poycotting you as they did the Newss | Mir. Platt-I object allowed. Witness-They said they would follow us as long as the News or longer if necessary. Something was then said about subscribers. | Glidden said he shouldn't go for them, but l for our large advertisements.
 1 MT. Alling-Was anything said about | servant girls advertisements?
 Mr. Platt-I object-alIowed. Witness-Glidden said when the boycott
 began we wouldn't have so many of them l They said that the union had taken in four l of our men, asked him if all the men | would have to leave the office and he said all but Skinner who would take frame. | He said that MT. Pitman and the two boys ! could stay. These were the two Jacobs boys. 1 MT. Glidden came there the next morning l'uhen I was there.
 l19. filling hore read the letter sent March t Gliddena Witnes-vou deliver that letter to He took it, read it, ariir' the next morning. 3 ! fight and then walked out tnstThat means
 present when the grand committee Vlsl.t was n ,and Hunie acting as spokesman sald Una 70 tboSs we turned the office over t' SC bo.... tne ot. in forty-eight hours we would b. le sGIeoGted csGe tI Hr. Conklin said "We can de Id ,ror,t ua1 Tn iorty-eisht seconds by saying VI Id nert C4 da % It." l saw the boycott circular le le some clreuArs and he said he lad ruined ou f oosiness 10 Il extent of thhty-two sub T T scrloers that da9 That is the Isst time Ill had an interview ~4h him ,n Mr. ALlIng-Did t9jdden say wAere tn lNe N red circulars were prilted. Witness-No y sir, saw him coming oue of Mailho1se' le printing office with them. Cross-examin, y tion followed by Attorney Platt- IS Haven't you confused several conve1 'r sations with the one on that evening
 Witness-No sir
 2. Mir. Platt-Did you hear the word boycot
 used at that interviews Witness-It ws used by Glidden
 MT. Platr-Have you and MT. Pratt an ,s Conklin and MT. Darlington talked over th = = matter with the union? Witness-No, si1 10 we haven't talked very much about it.
 MT. Platt-Did you ever go over the tes
 timony with Mr. filling? Witness-No. si1 e MT. Platt-Did you see the circular . brought out from the door of Mailhouse I1I printing office? Witness-I did, and hear a ad them talking about it.
 MT. Platt-Did you ever say to any partie v on the street that you did this only to ge J ! even wit Glidden? Witness-No, sir John s. Fowler, business manager of tn z Morning News, was then called on the stan. and asked if he signed the original negotia tions for settlement between his paper ant the boycotters published in the Morning News January 19, and if he received the ori
 giual copy from Defendants Mulcahy ane :, ! Glidden. Professor Platt objected to tn . ! testimony.
 Judge Stoddard-Ask the preliminary questions and MT. Platt can object to thu E paper when submitted.
 Witness-I saw the original the Tuesda,
 evening previous to the printing of the arti ! cle.
 MT. Alling-Were Mr. McNamara and MT II 5Iaff1 ! sented it to youl Witness thought they
 were. MT. Platt vigorously objected to each question.
 MT. AIling-Did that committee have
 charge of the boycott of the News.
 | Mir. Platt-I object.
 ! Long arguments ensued between counsel
 Attorney filling held that the same persons | who were boycotting the COURIER had boy | cotted the News, and that they had threat
 ened to do the same thing to the CoURIEF
 that had been done to the News and theil
 demands as set forth in the News articl were
 clearly admissible, the cases being parallel
 The assailants were the same, the case was | similar Mr. Conklin testified to what Gid
 den told him about the News boycott. The
 union announces that they will treat the
 canRIER the same as they did the News
 Now, isn't IL ss- -fns- -fArence in the case that
 the conspirators meant to exact or~e-a--.- z
 of of the money SSvoo to seanst Rny tn. tho COURIER the same as they did in the News | case Here was that same union, managed by the same committee. They come to ] another paper in the same town the only of ! fense they committed being the same, and | they say by way of threat, they will adopt | the same course against the COURIER they did against the News. They propose to ex- act or extort from the COURIER as they did from the News. MT. filling asked that the testimony be admitted.
 ,.s- Platt strenuously objected. The
 cam tha irisd;a7,o, was entirely out of
 tne 9Irisaiction % i1 of the court. They
 they do it only to confuse the jury s--a ore, nre- judice them against the defense. In this
 case the fact has not been known that they demanded any money, because if they had I \ should never have connected myself with the
 Case. The State now puts in an unanimous paper not signed by anyone which has noth-
 Ing to do with the case.
 Judge Stoddard said that if the evidence
 was claimed only as part of the res gestse. | he should agree with Professor Platt but ! that satisfactory reason had been stated by the State for its admission, as it appeared \ that Glidden had said that the News had been boycotted, referred to what had been ! done by the boycott, and then threatened to boycott the COURIER. The judge thought ' that Glidden's remarks were equivalent to a \ direct statement that he would do to the \ COURIER precisely what had been done to the ys The State shows that Glidden himself made explicit demand for money. Now Gid den said that they would carry on the boy colt the same way as with the News. Sup pose he had assaulted the manager of the News office, and he threatened MT. Caring ton with the same treatment as the News, wouldn't the testimony be allowed to show what he meant by thiss Whether this is demand for money the.jury must decide, but I think the question admissible and admit it.
 MT filling then read the article of agree ment between the News and the Typographi- cal union, after which the judge said it was admissible only against Glidden.
 MT. Aling-Will you state what took place when that agreement was given to youa Witness-I asked the committee the reason why they wore boycotting the News and they said because it was non-union office and because we didn't pay union prices. I said, ''What arrangements can we make to take off the boycottG" One of the committee said they had a statement drawn up. Some of the committee said they had been to expense of $15,000 in boycotting the News and thought $500 would be fair for us to pay of this $15, 900. John Mccarthy was with me-