Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1894-04-05
Won TOBEL WINS.
The Jury in the Case of Won Tobel Against
the Democrat Publishing Co. Decide
in Plaintiffs Favor.

No case heretofore brought to trial
in the Fergus county courts has drawn
so many hearers as the case oil Rudolf
| Won Tobel VS.. The Democrat Publish
ing company for libel. From Satur-
day noon until Tuesday night the
court room was constantly crowded
to it's utmost, including a large num-
| Der OF ladies, to hear this trial.
The complaint set forth the publi-
cation by the Montana Democrat on
August 31st last of the following
language:
Last Thursday a case was tried in the
| United States land office which developed
how thoroughly INSCRIPTIONS some attor-
neys can be. The homestead OF Al. Jo
son was being contested by j. b. Lafon-
taine. a half breed. David Scott repre-
sented the defendant and r. Won Tobel APP
peared for plaintiff. The half breed can
neither read nor write, and is also partially
blind. Taking advantage of these condi-
tions Won Tobel had the unfortunate man
sign an affidavit declaring himself a native
born citizen, when, as a matter OF Tact, it
was known he was born in Winnipeg, Man
itoba. What can people think OF an attor-
ney who will thus advise a client to commit
deliberate perjury?
Any lawyer who persistently advises
gated to Deer Lodge. Lewistowni is afflicted
with one of these pests, but the indications
now are that his legal career will soon
abruptly terminate.
Plaintiff denied that such affidavit
was false, or that he had the unfortu-
nate man sign such affidavit; also
that his reputation as a lawyer was
good, that he had been injured by the
publication Of such articles and prayed
damages to the amount of $4,000.
Defendant did not deny the publica-
ton OF articles referred to, but at
tempted to justify them. F. f. Smith
and f. X. Cheadle appeared for plain
tiff and James Donovan and b. C.
White for defendant. A jury was OBJ
tanned much sooner than generally
anticipated and included thefollowing
men: F. N. HOFFMAN, Oscar Helsing,
Britten Barrett, Ed Mcdonnell, |. Nj.
Hobensack, X. A. Jellison, VIM. Hall,
Charles Mclaughlin, George Heiser.
man, Gearge Eastman, VIM. Hortor
and ]. II. Douglass.
+. f. Smith briefly opened the case
for the plaintiff and b. c. White for
the defendant. Mr.. Won Tobel was
first put upon the stand and sub
Stimulated the complaint in all par
Donovan failing to shake the testi.
mony at all. An important point
was settled at this time. Mr.. Dono-
van attempted to rake up some old
troubles of Mr.. Won Tobel and to 60
back a number OF years but was
limited by the court to the specific
allegations set forth i'm complaint or
to general reputation. Mr.. Burg, reg
lister of the land office, swore to the
effect that the blind breed, Lafon-
tame, signed affidavit before him. Mr.
Gray swore to the general circulation
of the Montana Democrat after which
the prosecution rested.
Defense called w. Il. Mcfarland in.
tending to introduce a line of testi.
mony regarding an affidavit made be.
fore him as registry agent in 1892,
and also to introduce in evidence reg.
lister and affidavit. Testimony was
admitted by court on the understand.
ing that defense must prove Won
Tobel's connection with registry books
or his knowledge OF the entries or
same. This they wholly failed to dc
and finally all testimony in this line
was stricken out by the court. La
fontaine was put upon the stand, but
proved a poor witness as he contra
dicted himself repeatedly and was
vague in his replies. Il. j. Johns ties
titled that he had no animosity to
ward Mr.. von Tobel, but on cross ex
animation was compelled to admit
expressions of malice. Witness alst
acknowledged that article was pub
lished without proper investigation o
facts and uDon the word of Davif