Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-11-30
HOW IT WAS DONE.
Sam ellison First Cave The lliOTma.
ton 10 Manager P. h. Llllal,
LASSAS TOLD TUE REPORTER,
And That Was How the story About
Little Caroline Hansen Got
Into the "Tribuue.D


Tho further hearing Of the Fenstor-
maker. Tribune libel suit, the damages
In which are laid at $4,000, was 70.
sumed before Judge Bartch aud jury
In tho Third district court this morn.
ing.
Counsel for the PLAINTIFF are Atlor.
nsys j. A. Williams and John VI.
Zane; for the defendants Hilea d
Miner and Judge Powers.
The little girl Caroline Hanson, one
OF the principal figures In the trial,
was Ia court tubs morning and Eat with
those now caring Tor her. She IL a
bright intelligent.lOoking child about
Twelve years Of age, well dressed and
has the Appearance " being well
looked after by her present custOIiAns.
Wed eaday afternoon WAS well nd
vanctd when a Jury hhd been secured
Co tfy the case, the following having
uuen sworn! Clint |. Moon, Edward
Morton, A. Austin, George Walton, q.
h. Favour, n. a. sherman, b. H.
rhornberg, IA. J. Faust, n. }. Grun4-
land, Daniel Latham, John D.sponoo5
Jhmta W. SULLIVAN.
Attorney John NJ. Zane made the
opening audrUss 10 the jury for the
plaintiff, after which Manager T.. IL.
LannAu was called.
Judge Powers objected 10 The taking
OF any testimony in the case, saying
the sriiclo complained OF lid not alltgu
anything against particular person,
but roierrou 10 n Clnsb " purauns-thp
Fenstefmskcr family Amos Fen.
stctmaker, therefore did not have n
CAUSE oI action,
Judge Bartoh oyorruled the obJsc.
ton.
The plalntin's counsel then rustrI
their case, the fact oi circulation aud
publication being admitted,
The defense next moved that the
plaintiff be nUn.suited, iOf the reasons
that no public oiiensp had been charged
iu the article complained II; that It-
words were not aououablo on thciffau,;
that Il was privileged publication;
that there was no proof that the article
referred TO plaiulin, and no proof that
FcnsItTmAkur had been charged with
"a crime,
The court denied the motion.
Judge Powers made the opening
statement Tor the defense, tcmaTkiug
% would be shown that the article
alleged 10 be- libelluus was substantially
true. IL would alec be shown that the
Fonsl0tmAEefs had a had regulations,
tat tho iHmly was roputeu 10 have
receive. stolen goods, and that mem.
berof n had been Indicted. II the
plaintiff had the misfortune 20 be a
member " such a family, that fact
would alicut his fight to recover dam.
ages. Inc article had been published
la good faith, Aud the comment Ia IL
yas warranted. The defense would
show thAt Mrs. Feustefmaker hau
been cruel 10 another cniiu, anu would
prove also that mumters Of the Fous
termaker family had been guilty Of
acts VI cruelty 10 the Hansen onilu
subsequent to tne publication OF the
article complained OF.
Eighteen WITNESSES for the defense
were then sworn, aud Mf. Launau
again took the stand, lie testified that
he was not acquzinled with any mem
Der Uf tho FeuuturmAkot family before
the publication Of the article com.
planned OF, AMI that he furnished 10
The TeIotter who wrote tho article
Tho information on which u wac
based.
The plaintiff objected 10 thi, line Of
testimony. Tho defense argued that
Il was proper Tor the purpose OF reuuI.
ting malice.
Judge Bittch took the objection
uuuUradviscmuut, aud courg adjourned
until Friday morning.
when the trial was refumod this
morning the point taken under advise
ment by the couit on "Wednesday alter
noon WAS passed upon, Judge Bartuh
ruling thnt the evidence In mitigation
VI damages was admissible. To this
the pininuh'a counsel excepted. Man
Agef LannAn wac then Recalled 10 the
WitueHs-stAud, anu IA answer 10 Judg q
Powers repeated that II was lac who
communicated the information upon
which the article was written 10 tue
reporter. The iAUis were given ~ him
ny =. II, ellison.
"What was your purpose or motive,
In having II Publisher" asked Judge
Powers; when question was objected
10 10y Attorney Lnuu on the ground OF
irruleyancy anu immsIrnahty, The
objection WAS, however, Oy0rfulrd.
Witness antwsred that his only m 10
live was to carry cut the suggestion
made 10 HIM by his in.ormhnI wnU
thought thatii tile iaots were punished
sOme one might be- found who wOuil
give the child good home aud pef-
hAps adopt her; Aud also M AN Item oil
news lie houcslly believed Mr.. al.
sons statement 10 be- true, Had known
Gilson some twenty-five years VII.
ness had no ill.ieolng whatever
NgRntt the Feustermakun; no uid moi
know Ihe family nt all.
Attorney Zane-lu abolition 10 the
motive which you fret suggested, dlu
you not thiuk that you would like O.
tee this In the Tribune 10 startling
piece oi newt2
Witness answered that probably he
thought IL was news, though no MIN,
self was not much OF q Judge NJ ~
news. Ho gave the facts 10 the re-
porter and loft him 10 use them In hi
own way.
3. "A. ellison was called and testified
thatin April, 1891, no had a o0uversa
ton with Mr.. Lauuan la regard b. the
facts contained IN the article In queU
ton. Witness did not know tue
Funsermaker family. He INST raw
tho little glrl Caroline Hansen at The
term nus " the railroad track At stock
ton, To1ele county, sometime uuring
the month OF Apnl, 1891, anu mad
some talk ith her.
Attorney Zane objected 10 the nd'
"a o.. 80. N.HH