New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-16
ELLIOTT T. SHEPARD WINS.
, VERDICT FOR HIM IN THE GRAY SUIT.
THE PLAINTIFF To PAY FIVE PER CENT OF
THE AMOUNT FOR WHICH HE SUED
HE NAY APPEAL.

THE AMOUNT FOR WHICH HE SUED
NE NAY APPEAL.
Colonel Elliott +. Shepard yesterday secured
srdict In his favor in the action brought OS rf""'
{ Gray against him to recover Sls.l4o Tor anesou
,oocb Of contract. The argument OF codnsel IN Tue
csso occupied the whole morning. ana 'he jury "
,rrned It's verdict late In the afternoon.
,,dre Parker instructed his officers AT tho opening
-, ,ho court TO admit only as many people 'o ''o
co,rt room as there seats TO ACCOMMODATE "e"'
A. a consequence great many people ""o "'"' "
Al. court house 10 hear the summing up vi ''e wv"
=, in the case were unable to gain au"''''''.
80 WAS crowd outside the doors. but ihs'ue ''e
o,,rt room the only indication that case OIL ",o'e
w. ,,e,ol interest was being tried was the ciose
.,,,,o, which those present paid to the woruS VI
49, counsel In summing up and OF Judge rarNo' III
charging the JURY , I'D. orc,nent for
Iohn F. Parsons, In beginning his argument 10
colonel shepard. submitted TO the court L.
.1ne Mail and Express oihces ur""" D' 80, col,
nv lie then expressed his regret 'hat DIS 'V'
To- - ,udco Davis was not TO sum up Ior 'no
,rs,ead OF himself that the wit Win V"i..
Co,onel rpCerson might regnlc thosc presel'' ,nd
=, MOT with equal wit. lie SAID tnal ''' ,,.
~ most charitably dealt with oy Coione' gu. go,
,ha, colonel shepard had paid Ism noe'a,' ,,uod
,od ~ a good return-a return winch ne "n,
aao.vo Colonel shepard brought Gray run vi"
" ND n,aced him In charge OF Inc 'n'i or.
1880 At n handsome salary. Coio"ei CIV
80 entitled TO receive good service "o"' o.,
10 him conform 10 the rules OF Tue I'm naa
,,,s case was concerned Colonel o"ep,U w =,
a. ., cot drunk II he wished. The charses y,
right =" - ains, him were false, but Coiohei
drunkenness &c u,,over md he was not bound 10
shepard was the eihPloS' gu"
Cray 10 keep sober "a ,r-oor rs much
60 ton had right TO drink anu s"0"' 49,. n
. no liked in private-that was ms ouo''' , rvnres.r
ssd no right to swear In " Inc M',i ""u NIX durinr
Hsu -. 20 drink 10 interfere with his WORN u,'l"e
m
business no'' VA hocouse he did Colonel shepard had
49,. rronnd for complaint against h'n' "i"s
-! .r'o,t ~ Mr. Harroun January a, loSV' VIM"
80 tho immediate cause OF his uScn'Is'' ,..o, q
60 Of Colonel Shcpards ORDERS anu ,y 60,
,oach a, the contract between Gray anu ~ chow,
ord As 70 Gray's INCOMPETENCE nav rXnressp
nv. ,4.,orvh .he business OF " The Mall anu hNp'9
'"u' - ed The paper had made no money vi az
" :, che added expcnses and OF the great ic"A"e'
=, nroats which u competent man "ou'u " ha
80 GAY had declared That Colohel 0"oP"N
- him 10 do underhanded things lie nav -.
r,,s,y no ground for the claim. lie "iu '." u,m,
" colonsl shepard had never said word u MN
tus' 49, 49,, ., hrno the Police Commissioners or using
~ -.r methods vet without any previous sugses
LIONS 10 had taken upon himself to charge VaI OV'V'e.
sbanerd had intended that Gray shoWd Dee'n p'"sy
:. hrberv The claim the counsel SAID was laiSe "i
,.,eIv impugned the characters OF DOM Ooi0h'i "f
rd ond police Commissioner McCavc'
~ have shown he said in closing. THAT GRAY
o ,,comnetent that his habits were lheomp''io"
with his duties on the paper, and that ne orohc ~"
contract nv his treatment OF Mr. Harroul' anu We
ro 70 return a verdict for the defendant MI rai
sons spoke for over an hour' a..
colonel Robert g. IngersOn summed up LOT inc
,,.,. II. nretsc.d his argument with few witty
,uss IN Mr. Psrsons's aueons TO himself ana said
no honed there would be no prejudice against MN
hscause he wasn't Presbyterian Tie Spilikieu VIII
tcisms beautifully throughout his argument lac "'"
I'D the four charges against his eheh'' tnose u VI"
bonesty ncompetency, ncOmpathlllty ana preach Vi
contract The charges OF dishonesty against MI "i''
had fallen the ground. he said ana the cnA's
., ,ncompetency were Rmsy. Colonel Shcpard ohoo
wrote TO Tho Journalist that MI Gray Lao on'sro"
Chicago Anybody who had outgro"h On'"so was
compctcnt 10 do anything. The charges OF ushocsN'
,rcompe,eucv and breach of contract had all been
made against Mr.. Gray TO cover the fact that 0ooel
shepard wished to get rid of him. or to cut down MS
,.lary Ie was angry with Mr.. Gray, and by various
steps tried TO get rid Of him, and at last sent Mr.
Usrroun to him in a particularly irritating way in
orler TO get a cause for Gray's dismissal. Coohei
.h.nard himself had made the incompatiblty. There
was incompatibity, but it arose from an attempt vi
Colonel Shepard 20 get political advertising by BIRDING
officials.
Colonel Ingnrson then analysed mlnuely the Ear
Varhor memorandum and said II was Impossible TO
Rad 1t and believe it written by an honest man.
The present charge against Gray OF blacKHah WIS
recent Manufacture. Gray ma HeNcr Uic'''"NN
Colonel Shepard with the letter and only kept i TO
clear himself against such charges as the present
against him, when he learned the sort oi man
Colonel shepard really was
He denied that the memorandum, suppoNing IL 10
contain suggestions of bribery cast apersioh OIL
Police Commissioner McClave's honesty. No man was
responsible for schemes which other men concOcted
against him. II was evidence that Mr. MCCIaNc
was weak and would Yield easily because Colonel
shepard said -. Mr. McChvc had not said that he
wGnd add 5000 to me nH ooo, n hnsf man U
Tho Colonel said that The entire defence OF Noiohei
Shepard had been manufactured for the present OcCh
attempt 70 bride TIE Police Commits Colonel
the incommtbity. II was not lhe Iu' vi III nt.
gray, and he asked the jury TO give MN IN thcir
verdict 'he ig amount Tor Tch Ne Ha aH i Ir sui
told the jurymcn That If they believed that Gray
for the defendant. II they believed that either
GRAY had been established, Colonel shepard had the
T1eet 10 discharge him. and they must return YER
was ncommubillty between Colonel shepard and Mr.;
Gray through fault Of Colonel shepard, they must
return verdict for the defendant, Bnt H. haV VIE
passed oil the other considerations thcy believed that
the evidence showed that The incOmpabillty was due
10 refusal Of Mr.. Gray to do undermined work
turn verdict fo- the paintih.
The case was given 10 the jury at 80 p. m:
1t was recalled at o'clock and charged on special
points At the request Of counsel on both sides.
The inrymcn were thcn taken ont for luncheon by
for consultation about , O'Clock. At 4 40 O'Clock
i4ey returned verdict in favor Of Colonel shepard
Of he amount caimcd by Gray. /. NJ. Ditenhoefer,
On s1on behalf Of GRAY moved for new trial, on TIE
OF evidence, but the motion was denied Mr.. Gray
Colonel shepard thanked the Court and shook the
hand Of each Of The Jurors.
SIRE SAYS THERE WAS NO ENGAGEMENT