Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-03-05
THE "BEE, LIBEL SUIT.
Proceedings Before Justice Post Yester-
day-Henley's Testimony.

Proceedings Before Justice Post Yester-
day-Henley's Testimony.
The suit for criminal libel instituted by
Vim. Henley against C. X. and v S. Nc
CATCHY, was commenced in Justice Post's
Court at 10 NJ. yesterday. The prosecu-
ton was represented by District Attorney
Buckley and City Attorney Anderson, the
defense by Grove L. Johnson. The case
was opened by District Attorney Buckley.
who read the complaint 10 the Court. The
alleged libel is based upon an article which
appeared in the Daily Bee on the evening of
February IL, 1886. The language used
that the prosecution claims was libelous
is as follows:
Justice Henley, whom the city pays 5000 a
year ioT doing nothing seems to have again dis
tlnguished himself as tool of Chinese villainy
III VIII be remembered that few months ago he
was OF great service TO sam Lock and other
Cinnamon interested in kidnapping case A
woman was arrested in San Francisco upon a
warrant issued by Henley, not at the instance
of the District Attorney or City Attorney
brought before him a prisoner released on
bail and allowed to be taken away by her pre-
tended husband 10 a house in the lower part of
the CITY, and that night was put into a buggy
and taken away from the county. The alleged
signatures OF the bondsmen were, in reality not
signatures of any existing persons aud the
men were mere dummies. II was freely talked
that the Chinese who perpetrated this disgrace
ful JOB expended S4O0 in doing so. Justice
Henley must have known before he acted in the
case That the charge of larceny was tr1mpedup,
simply because every official knows that such is
always the fact where Chinese women are to be
arresied. Fong Lin the woman who
fed from her den of in fanny at o clock on sun
day morning with one whom she preferred to
her Celestial owner is the victim of the last CON
spiracy. Mention of her capture was published
in the Bee of yesterday The capture was ac-
complished through the assistance of this same
Justice Henley. If General john T.
Carey and the Honorable Justice Henley knew
that the sun shines the tide moves or the river
flows, they knew that justice was being prosti-
tuted.
William Henley, the prosecuting wit
ness, was the first to testify. He said he
had lived in Sacramento for thirty years
and was the person referred to as Justice
Henley, and Hon. Justice Henley, in the
article referred to in the complaint He was
Justice of the Peace of the city OF Sacra-
mento, and had been for the past fourteen
months. He had read the article referred
to in the Bee. On the 18th of February the
defendants were the editors and proprietors
OF the Daily Ecening Bee, a paper pub
lished in this city.
The District Attorney offered the article
taken from the Bee in evidence.
Mr.. Johnson objected, but the Court
overruled the objection.
On cross examination witness was ex-
amined infinitely regarding the issuance of
the warrant for the arrest of Fong Lin He
was also questioned closely regarding a
similar Chinese case which had been ex-
amined in Justice Henley's Court some
months previous. He was then questioned
regarding the acts of his past
life, as TO whether he was not an embezzler,
an obtainer of money under false pretenses,
and q dissipated individual He was ac-
cused of receiving moneys for tees which
were not accounted for to the State of coll
lectinG money from the city for office rent,
which he did not pay over to the owner of
the building 10 whom it properly belonged,
and for whom it was intended. His method
of keeping his docket was assaulted, il APP
pearing that no entries had been made
therein since August last, although several
cases had been heard and disposed of in his
Court since that date. That he kept no
cash book; had not made full returns of
marriage fees collected had made incorrect
entries in the docket, etc. Henley ad-
mitted that his books were not posted, and
cases not entered on his docket, but claimed
that the law specified no time in which
they should be made; he had all the
papers in each case, and when he felt so
inclined would enter them.
His cross-examination was severe, and
although his counsel interposed objections
to the questions, Henley insisted on an
swering them all, and did so to the evident
delight and satisfaction of counsel for de-
PENDANTS.
The defense admitted that c. X and V. S.
McClatchy were interested in the owner
ship and publication of the Daily Bee, a
paper of general circulation, and that they
did publish the alleged libelous article
This closed the evidence for the prosecu-
ton. and the Court took an adjournment
until 10 A. NJ. to-day.