Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-11-16
Attorney Arthur Browns S25, 900 Suit
Against the Tribune.
Manager =. II. L1unan Upon the Wit
ness.s and--A Question Of Priyi.
legged Communication.


was empaueled yesterday afternoon
aud the opening statement Of counsel
then made
MI Brown did not today ait within
the bar, but mingled with tue spec
ts,ors-oi whom there was larger
number THAI utual-in tbs rear Of the
o.uftfoUm.
1he case for the plainuf il being
conducted by Judse Henderson, Al.
torueys J. l.. Rawlius and G. ).
NauAu; Tor the defense Judge T. ,wefs,
Judge Miner and Attorney O.dvu
hiles appear.
Tue tifst witness called was Sir. T..
ii, Lnuuau, manager u Tue Uf5uHe.
Aief lac hal Answered QUO uf 40
formal questions, put by Judge Hen.
d. fs0u, counsel prUUeeIvu t. ietu ~
tue Jay, ifJm the HES OF the IrsjunC.
thV Aruclu CJmplaiu,u OF COutstuIus
the siirgel libel, Ia when MT. Brown
was styled "a uull.duzug HItucfat,"
The uH e uf lie publication wus Fsby.
l7,n, 1902, some days after tue CITY
eiccuuu. Counsel aiuU sought 10 intro.
ducr other articles which ne oialmru
bore upOu tue case ~ issu', tut
Juuge PJweu objected anu Unlisted
that thr particular article ~ question
WIS ~ vuSguI Ar vOuigiulug cru.
CEN Il tne aus Of pubic tfiis,r,
Aud would nUt, u hseif bu n bass iuf
su ACTON Tor ddmagUs uutss Hc,uai
maiice were MA W.. Malice Ia TACT
was not alleged Ia tnis Ompiaiut.
JuIg hvuIufrJu rvpuv, auJ ciicJ
various legal au,horiti,s. Ito wac iOI.
luw,u Uu ,hv same side b. Az fuvy
NaflAn. Tue latter said tuai, us
dattvf VI fact, tnis noel VAS nJt mere.
~ directed "a terms VI. criticpui; u
70 ,cucI tue pia nun 80 al iuuiviluai
As sell Ne IN oil ct. 10 dealt Win a.
sod on ,hv street suustq cent 10 the
81 q, ION en- went 10 SNOW tnat he lutD
~ gut 70 Haunt ate tue ystvr by al-
visuiy nun 10 put uut NJ tLetUwH. lac
No u uii-J ziug, "used ~ cOuutClDp
WIG he "a ,vf, was susceptible VI Il
driamitOIy mesui x.
Attufuvy ~ 90 Hilos was next
heard. anu iu 20 utehuo o. certain
yOuou VI Judge HoldvfsJb's open.
INK ,tdemyht UI tue ease unsrnc rf-
"a q ths tamr ~ Rl"Hrudufs ,uisn iDsc
uiLl" v hat tue defense Contrhu, "a
~ss tuHt when msu Uccui led puu.
10 position, a luIlic new pa. or nsd u
fight 10 CfucIuu he aU,s HIu
TO call puUnc s,tuutiOn 10 his
tUnduc.. such Communication was
ltIVllus ed, aau unless ,ifvaauI uattu
was proved there was no ptrEump tluu
OF malice. Where IN mat AftIcle,
CIuusti .bKtd, wAs there Any charge
made against Arthur Brown whicn
was not la feiVfunCc TO his 1iliCiaI O..
pschy2 -
lLis latter remark eliciloI from
Judge Henderson tue qucstivu-ls IL
the uusiuvs- VI puUiIc Nicer ~ uuvu
s.ueU. dy out OF town IA order to
- ard III damage suits2"
Judge Powers voulufud the 0bserva.
tiOu, soto VOos, thaI suua things had
bveu known &, happen.
Attorney Riwiins Rlto addressed tue
court Un tue question Of privilege Hud
taiu n II were shown that the afliuie
undud TO uispafagu tue Individual,
then malice Wa Implied. Ihiu cIulI
not be "a priviiegud communication
iuasmueh M tho PLAINTIFF uuuvs ~ All
vlucuOt idge ceased on February stn,
Ani tnis arlclo appeared on tue Ia d..
Besides, there was reference TO the
uuienduut a. an inIividusi-, ne A,sur.
ton that ne was tying " Drive some
b0 y out Of tho town.
Judge Powers closed the Arguments,
whicn t0,k up fully an hours tune.
lie said tnat Ia tue original aTtioiv
there was no alls cation Whatever Of
Auy corrupt OF lutgal rejection VI any
mans vote, or thht any voter was
'buli.dtz 3D." Mr.. Rawiins took the
peouhai ground tnat after an TN ERE
puzzle iuncti bu had ceased tue lubiic
hRd no iuttntT interest IN hiH cDuuuc,
while Ia Office; but counsel cOntrnduu
that this was altogether wrong. sup
pose man had been a detauiteT Nhi .
ia tiilc,; would not "a newspaper hAyb
tue risht 10 crilioise his dOipgs after.
wardt2 tie head tuat tue plant ti's
counsel were attempting to mRkeA case
here Dy means OF drag net.
Eventually tue cDuft overfuled the
objection Oi the defense AID judge
Powers entered an excel ton.
Judge HuuuoiHOu 'sthyou TO read Ia
tue Jury from tue Tribune 4 es an article
Ia iis issue Of February ., 1872, ussurd
"FOurth pteciuot business" nut upon
tue admission or otherwise OF thla INA
evidence there ensued another con
tfoversy. Portions OF this, however,
the court allowed 10 be real, aud the
reference therein 10 ATthur Brow
sud another caused n ripple OF laughter
ia court, the plainlin himself iuuulg
Ing TO tue extent OF ssi,kiy suite.
A portion OF a publication, aIpst
enty IN ths nature VI an AdvrIlitr
menI, OF date February I'm, neaI,u
uro prosecute the SUITE" aud Elk net
by Mvtsrs. Powers anu Lippnau, Wal
ueGttrau w Juuse llvudrtsun. luittu,
refusal o the ia iges II election IN IN,
Fourth pr,cibot " adpit Librral vote
was deUOmiuHiod AZ "aTDl,Iaty, uujus
aud uutuasUi sblu." Among u,nrl
things AltO submitted was an ArtIcl,
with the caption "ElvC,I0u action
beIun,1i which attention was difsup
ed 10 Fourth precinct "autOcrats.n
When court convened thlH Afternoon
tho piAiutitl's c uusel having *
AmIneu Nit. LanuAn Unly -mOuOI
was made Tor u nUu-suit, but tnls Wa
oveTruled by the court, ami then
JuIge Powers made "a bne Oprniul
statement 10 the jury ON behalf VI ia
defrndanir. He said he inIendeu q
prove that tho uitiols cumplaine1 o
was publishbl without ma ic, an
simply Aa ~ item Of news, anu Tho
what was stated theTeiu was true. lh
publication VI the item was mauo II
good faith, Hegntl's volunteers,
statement being given subsnnuaily u
Il came iTomIhis lips, M Hsgnry him
self would testify.
Jamrs Is. Bluur, At pfesent publl'he
OF tue Sali Lake Argus, anu iormtrll
a a "a