The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1891-07-09

Levi E. Wise and George N. Wise, OF
Greentown, this county, ask the modest
sum of $4,000 from the DEMOCRAT PUB
| LIsHING Co, on account of an article pub
| lished in the ws-DEMooRAT and STARK
| COUNTY DEMooRAT, which did not please
| those gentlemen. The demand is small,
and perhaps il the proper request had
been made at the editorial room, when
| the "devil" was in, he would have drawn
check for the amount. As the call was
not made the 'devir' Is In no way to
| blame, and the company will have to take
the responsibility.
The action is brought on account OF an
article published which gave the partict
lars OF a suit commenced In common pleas
court by Daniel Myers and Henry II.
Brooke against Levi E. Wise and George
N. Wise. The article simply gave the
statements made in the petition, and con-
sequentIy the claim will not be paid until
the courts have passed on the case. This
is the first suit ever brought against the
DEMOCRAT PUBLISHING Co., and it Is plain
to see that there is no ground for the
action. Lahm q Smith are plaintiffs at
torneys.
The petition alleges that at and before
the time of the publication OF the article
in question, the plaintiffs had the esteem
and confidence of their neighbors and the
community, as honest, upright citizens,
and were never suspected of robbing the
mail, nor of forgery, and had always sus-
tanned a good reputation and had never
been guilty OF the crimes aforesaid.
The petitions further charge that the
defendant well knowing the premises and
we'll knowing the same to be false and in
tending to injure the plaintiffs in their
reputation, did on June IL, 1891, falsely,
wickedly and maliciously publish the fol-
lowing article:
"Daniel Myers and Henry II. Brooke
have filed suit in common pleas court
against Levi E. Wise and George N. Wise.
Plaintiffs in their petition state that in
February, 1890, they were partners in buy
ing and selling live stock, under an ar
rangement that Myers should lend his ex-
perience in the business and Brooke
should furnish the money. On tho 18th
day OF February, 1890, plaintiffs state that
they were the owners of New York
draft payable to the order of the plaintiff,
Daniel Myers, OF the value of S9S5.1S.
Plaintiffs further state that defendants,
Levi L. Wise and George N. Wise fraudu-
lently conspired together to cheat and de-
fraud plaintiffs, by secretly and surrepti-
tiousiy taking from the postoffice at Green
town, Ohio, the envelope enclosing the
draft, took from the envelope the draft,
and forged, or procured to be forged, upon
the back of said draft, the name Of said
Myers, obtaining the money on the same
and converting it to their own use. Plain
tiffs state that they have demanded the
draft or its equivalent in money, but de-
PENDANTS refused TO give it up. There
fore plaintiffs state that they have been
damaged in the sum of S9S51S, for which
they ask judgment"
Each of the defendants would like to
have The DEMOCRAT PUBLISHING Co. pay
him $4,000. The claim is set up that the
article in the NEws-DEMoCRAT injured
each OF them in the sum of 81, 600 and the
one in the STARK COUNTY DEMOCRAT the
same amount.