Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1895-08-16
$4,000 LIBEL SUIT.
Brought by Gov. Woodbury.
Against the Rutland Herald.

Request for Retraction, the Reply, and
GOV. Woodbury's Statement.
Gov. U. A. Woodbury. instituted last
Saturday libel suit for $4,000 against
the Rutland Herald. Papers were served
by Sheriff Reeves of Burlington. The
property of the Herald and Globe associa-
ton, publishers of the Herald, was attached,
and p. c. Clement, owner of controlling
interest in the association, receipted for
the property.
The LibeIIous Article.
The Herald article on which the libel
suit is based was published August I. 1t
filled two columns and was headed "Gov.
Woodbury. as a Rumseller" The follow
ing is part of it:
"The Herald has in its Office three bot
ties containing whiskey and one contain
ing lager beer which the purchasers say
they bought within a week in the Van Ness
House in the ordinary way and without
the smallest difficulty. II has also one
bottle of whiskey which the purchaser says
was bought at Lyman ~ Halls drug store,
in the building owned by Gov. Woodbury.,
withina week.
ut is perfectly true, ,as the Herald under
stands, that the Van Ness House has no
bar, and for a long time has been without
one 1t is also true that there is no law
against keeping bar The law is against
selling rum. And the Van Ness House
has sold rum, straight along. Apart from
bar it has sold it precisely as hotels all
over the world sell it; sent it to guests at
their rooms and served it to them at the
public tables 1t has done this straight
along, day after day, and days and nights
and Sundays--it will be noted that one of
4
Sunday-and week after week and year
after year There has, to be sure, been
some hocus pocus and beating the devil
around the stump in the business, but moth
ing has interfered with the regular and
prompt service of rum to guests of the Van
Ness House, as guests or hotels are served
everywhere.
"Mr. Woodbury.. if We are rightly in
formed, was never the active man of de-
tails in running the Van Ness House, as
there has always been a partner or salaried
manager to take that work, but he has all
along been the substantial landlord back of
everything as well as the owner of the
| building. 1t is hardly necessary to say
that the sale of liquor by his agents and
employees is selling by him. That is true in
reason, and the statute specifically makes
it true in law. The law also makes the
owner of a building in which liquor is sold
| liable as a seller.
Across the street from the Van Ness
House is Lyman & Halls drug store, in
building owned by Gov. Woodbury..
| The Herald understands that it is at times
in effect a wide-open saloon, while at other
| times liquor selling is stopped there, by
which it is understood that the selling to
strangers is stopped. 1t is a notorious
rum hole. Burlington people now say
that "the Van Ness House bar is in there
meaning that the hotel gets its liquor
| there.
I'VE had no,dispOSitiOn to criticiZise Gov.
| Woodbury. simply because of any liquor
selling he had been concerned in, but in
trying to show some of the weaknesses of
the prohibitory law we incidentally referred
to this case We were led to make the
reference especially by the curious parallel
that appeared between his case and that
| of Mr.. Howe of St. Johnsbury. Let us
suggest few points,
LAS vital part of his business Landlord
| Howe sold rum. Landlord Woodbury. did
the same thing. Landlord Howe owned
his hotel building and also another build
! ing in his town in which liquor was sold; ;
that is, to put it in prohibitionist form, he
owned two rum holes and ran one of them
| himself. The same thing was true of Mr..
Woodbury.. All the facts above stated in
regard to Mr.. Ho YES connection with the
| liquor traffic were notorious in his own
town and elsewhere, and in no way injured
his standing. The same was true with re-
gard to Mr.. Woodbury..
"Right here the parallel ends. Rum
seller Howe has gone out of business as
landlord, and is in prison. Rumseller
| Woodbury. continues in business as land
lord and is governor of the state of Ver-
mont"
Gov. Woodbury. Asks the Herald for "A
RetractiOn.
Gov. Woodbury. at once addressed a let
ter to the Herald, expressing surprise at
the appearance of the article and stating
that in the II years he had kept the Van
| Ness House there had been no intoxicating
liquors kept in or about it, nor had he been
engaged directly or indirectly in the liquor
traffic in the Van Ness or in any Other
place. "If the guests of the Van Ness
House" he continued, "have persuaded any
of my employees to act as their agents to
procure liquor for them, such employees
must have obtained it outside of the Van
Ness House, and they acted upon their
own responsibility and at their own peril.
You accuse me of owning two rum holes
and running one. You designate me as
"Rumseller Woodbury." and in other
words accuse me of being common crimi-
nal. / am willing to endure in silence or
dinary newspaper criticisms, but my per
sonal self-respect and my respect for the
high office in which the good people of the
state of Vermont have placed me, and my
desire that the fair name of Vermont
should not be traduced and dscredited
abroad, forbid my passing in silence the
highly libellous article referred to. l there
fore ask you TO make a complete and i'm
immediate retraction in your paper, fail,
ing in which l shall adopt legal means tc
bring you to account for your outrageous
libel"
The Herald's Reply.
The Herald occupied a column in com.
menting upon Gov. Woodbury's letter
The gist of its reply avs in the following:
"Gov. Woodbury's letter sounds as if he
thought we had charged him with person
ally buying and selling and handling liquor
We never intended to intimate anything OF
the sort. We charged that his servant:
had furnished liquor to the guests in theil
rooms and on the public tables, and that
not once or twice but continually and year
after year. If Gov. Woodbury. will admit
the truth of that, as his letter indicates ht
may, we have nothing more to say.
"As to retraction, the Herald made It's
statements upon what seemed indisputabl6
evidence, but is ready to cheerfully anC