Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-01-29
SUED For LIBEL.
The California State Bank Brings Actie
Against the HBeeo


Against the "Bee."
/ The California State Bank has com
menced suit in the Superior Court agains
James McClatchy & Co., publishers of the
Sacramento Bee, for $4,000 damages fol
libel.
The suit is based on an article which ap.
peared in the paper mentioned on the 18th
inst. which purported to be the history OF
fraudulent transaction in which one
George Warren was alleged to have been
swindled by one William Harlow; and
further, that the California State Bank was
connected with the ransaction-having
been the holder of a contract drawn up be-
tween Harlow and Warren.
The bank people point out in their COM
plant that this article intimated that they
had "willfully, corruptly and in violation
of its duty as bank, connived and confed-
Grated with said Harlow to cheat and
defraud said Warren that it willfully abb
stracted or destroyed the contract with in
tent to iDjure Warren" In conclusion the
complaint sets forth that "the said publica-
tion was false, defamatory, malicious and
unprivileged, and by means of said false,
defamatory, s.malicious and unprivileged
PdbAN0L1OA luC DldluliA las DCCA
and damaged in the sum of SOS, 900 and
COSTS and such other further relief as to
the Court may seem proper"
The attorneys for the bank are: Charles
I. Jones, s. Scion Holl and Grove L.
johnson.
Our evening contemporary last night in
republishing the complaint, added that its
information concerning the alleged disap-
pearance of the document deposited in the
bank had been gained by one of its re-
porters from Mr.. Gerber, and that the
reporter had interviewed Mr.. Abbott, the
cashier, who had declined to say anything
about it. 1t added that it had made its
publication on statements of its reporter,
who still insists that he had correctly
reported what had been told him at the
bank.
WHAT THE BANK oFFIcIAs SAY.
As the suit was the subject of considers-
BILE talk last evening, RECORD UNION re-
porter called upon Messrs. Abbott and
Gerber, and asked them to state the facts
from their standpoint.
Mr.. Abbott replied that one of the dam
aging statements made in the article in
question, was that document left in the
bank in trust had vanished and could not
be found" when an interested party called
for it.
Now, the facts are" continued Mr.. Alb
bott, after the agreement in question was
deposited in the bank no one who had any
right to see it asked to see the agree
ment, excepting Mr.. Warren, who was
in the bank but once, and then went
away with correct copy, made without
expense to him. The agreement has
at all times since the 18th of October, the |
date of its execution, been in the custody of |
the bank. The notes mentioned were left |
by Mr.. Harlow for collection, and were |
collected for his account, like any other |
banking transaction of which the officers of |
the bank had no knowledge, other than |
such as concerned them as collecting agents. |
rhe agreement signed by Mr.. Harlow and |
Mr.. Warren is simple and straight one,
ow would be the last person to desire it to |
vanish"
Mr.. Gerber, when spoken to on the SUBJ
ect, said: ION October 18th last l wrote
IN agreement at the request of Mr.. Harlow
and Mr.. Warren, and the same was left
with the bank for safe-keeping. A day or
TWO thereafter Mr.. Warren called at the
bank and asked for copy OF the agree
ment. One of the clerks wrote a copy of
it, which l handed to Mr.. Warren, and
have not seen him since. After making
the copy | replaced the original in the
vault, where it has been at all times since.
No other inquiry was made in relation to
the document by anyone, and had no &C.
casion whatever to again refer to it. There
could be no possible advantage to
Mr.. Harlow to have the document van
ish,' and I did not state to anyone
that the paper had disappeared. The
statement published January 18th
that Warren appealed to the terms set
forth in the contract, and went to the bank
to secure that document, and that it had
and could not be found, is false
IN every particular. Upon inquiry, 1 find
hat no officer or employee of the bank, ex-
,ept myself, has ever spoken to Mr.. War
zen, or would know him if they saw him.
did not consider it my duty to explain |
he details of the transaction, no matter |
now simple it was, to reporter, much less
o say that the paper disappeared in some
way. 1 don't know how: / know when it |
vas looked for it could not be found