Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1886-07-08

COURIER, but also TO lnJure
sZsb0d <. who had anything thin to Dsp se
shows for itself. No matter whether Gid
den physically laid this card in the hands of
Mr.. Twitchell or not, it is evident that he
was concerned in it, and not only he, but
his associates were responsible. He said he
did not think it necessary to make the wit
ness give away the name of the party who
gave him this card or circular, but if your
honor compelled him to do SO why he
would have to do it.
Mr.. Platt continued to argue that the de-
PENDANT was not on trial for conspi racy, but
only for libel.
Judge Deming-So far I have tried to con-
fine the evidence to the acts of Mr.. Glidden.
Now it is testified to that Mr.. Glidden called
on the witness and told him that he had bet
ter stop his advertisement in the COURIER,
and as this card followed Immediately after,
it seems to me to be connected with Gid
denis act and therefore should be admitted.
do not think it necessary to make the wit
ness reveal the name of the party who left
the card.
Mr. Platt took exceptions to the ruling.
The examination of the witness was con-
tinued. Mr.. Twitchell in reply to Mr.. Al
ling said that he stopped his advertisement
in the COURIER in consequence of the notice
received.
On the cross-examination Mr.. Twitchell
said Glidden did not show him the card. He
said there were plenty of these cards circu-
lating about the shore yesterday.
Mr.. Platt-Who gave you that card?
Witness-I prefer not to answer that ques-
ton. I do not believe it would do any good
and might njure the party who gave it to
me, which have no desire to do.
Mr.. Daley argued at length against forcing
the witness to give the information required
by Mr.. Platt.
Judge Deming said he would not pass upon
Int of For ia
present and not pass upon it absolutely.
Cross-examination continued. Witness said
that Mr.. Conklin came to see him about ad
vertising and he told him that he should
probably advertise at some time. He did not
see the advertisement until three days after
it appeared in the paper. He said he was
given to understand that if he took out his
advertisement they would have to give the
reason why he took it out He said he LETT
his advertisement in the paper because he
thought it was for his interest to let people
know what he was doing Witness said there
people in any way or manner. They told me
that they thought would be foolish to take
out the advertisement.
To Mr.. Alling-Mr Conklin used very
unreasonable arguments about my leaving
my advertisement in the paper.
Witness said that ever since his advertise
ment appeared there had been an effort to
keep people away from his place. I was
told that there were ten in front of my place
the other day steering people away from
there. I did not see them.
William G. Pratt, editor of the COURIER,
was next called. He said he first met Mr..
Glidden on the Friday night preceding the
time when the boycott was put on. He said
that he supposed at that time that the CoUR-
Ter printers were to be admitted to the I'M
ion. told Glidden that supposed all the
men were to be admitted to the
union and he did not say whether they would
be or not. He said that he would report to
the union. Glidden called again with Mr..
Palmer. The latter said he thought there
was no ground for the course taken by the
Typographical union. Later the committee
called again and demanded that the Office be
turned over to the Typographical union with
in forty eight hours. L told them that would
not be done. They told us that they would
boycott US, and that there was plenty of
money to do it with. They thought we
might as we'll give in first as last, as we
would have to finally as the Morning News
had done.
William H. Conklin, of the COURIER, was
called. He testified that the COURIER had
never been a union office so far as he knew.
He said that when Glidden- came to the Of
fee the second time he was very much ex-
cited. He said there was trouble in the
Typographical union and that some of our
men had been rejected by the union, and he
did not know what the outcome of it all
would be-
Mr. Conklin told in detail what had trans
pired between the COURIER representatives
and the committee of the Typographical
union in substance given by Mr.. Pratt,
the preceding witness. In addition witness
gave the substance of what the committee
told them at their interviews, which in SUBJ
stance was that the COURIER would be
greatly injured if they did not
become union Office. Witness asked them
at the last interview if they thought it was
fair for them to refuse to admit into the
union men who had been with us for so
many years? The reply was that they could
not come in whatever we thought about it.
After this met Glidden and he said he
would injure the COURIER all he could, and
if he was locked up in Jail his wife would
carry ON the fight. At one time he told me
he had injured the COURIER to the extent of
thirty two subscribers.
Mr.. Plat cross-examined the witness at
some length, but did not bring out any new
facts of special Importance.
E. w. Baldwin was called and testified in
substance to the facts as stated by Mr..
Conklin. Witness among other things stated
that he heard Glidden tell Conklin that he
would break up the COURIER if it took eight
cen months to do it.
Mr.. Baldwin's evidence concluded the di-
rect evidence on the part of the State and a
discussion between the attorneys as to the
time to which this case should be adjourned
was had.
Judge Deming fixed Saturday, July 18th,
for the farther hearing, unless in the mean
time the attorneys should agree to an earlier
hearing.
Remarked by R. c. Joiner, of Allen P. O., Hills
dale Co o Mich a:f N0thin gave my rhe@matism
jy5 d&w 1wk