Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-08-22
Result of His Trial Today on the
Libel Charge.
Case TO GO TO THE GRAND JURY
Mr.. Kenny Denies Statements
Published by Defendant.
IN THE LICE URT

w nat is known as the Ala. libel case, IN
which Editor Andrew j. Boyer Is defendant
and Cornelius d. Kenny, the coffee and tea
merchant, is the prosecuting Witness was
called for trial in the Police Court at noon
today. The warrant in the case, as hereto
fore published in The Star, was sworn on.
by Mr.. H. G. Fant. who represents Mr..
kenny's business interests here, and was
based on the publication in the United
American, Mr.. Boyer's paper, of the fol-
lowing:
The Alleged Libel.
THAT one Andrew J. Boyer. with intent
to villify and defame one Cornelius d.
Kenny, did then and there publish in Il
certain newspaper certain malicious and
defamatOry libel in the words following:
1t is stated that Papist Kenny, the tea
merchant in this city, has openly declared
that he would never employ a Protestant
clerk in any of his several stores. branches
OF which are in Baltimore and Washington
and that he recently dismissed a worthy
young man against whom there was no
complaint other thar that he not
Romanist. 1t is also said of Kenny that
when he wanted I, clerk in his Baltimore
store he pasted to the notice the words:
cans steer clear of this Papist boycotter.
ITO The great injury, scandal and dis
grace of said Kenny
When the case was called Mr.. Woodbury.
w
that Col. Cook and Mr.. Naucz were asso-
ciated with him in the case.
Prosecuting Attorney ,effords represented
the government. and was assisted by Law
yer r. Ross Perry, who is Mr.. kennys
legal adviser.
A plea of not guilty was entered by coun-
sci for the defendant.
Lawyer Nauck said he was surprised to
find that one of his witnesses, man
amed Coxey. OF Cox. was not present in
court. and he said it may he necessary to
have him sent for.
Mr.. Jeffocds said that as this was to be
preliminary examination, and not trial,
he presumed the court would not go into
a hearing of the whole case
MIR. Nauck said that the court was well
aware that the law laid down in the books
gives the examining magistrate the right
to hear matters in explanation.
Judge Mills said that he would settle the
question when 1t was reached.
The First Witness.
MIR. FAINT was the first witness called
and he was shown the paper containing the
alleged libel.
Counsel admitted that the paper in ques-
ton was printed by the defendant
Witness called on Mr.. Boyer and consult
ed him about the publication. Boyer, he
said, told him that there an undercur-
rent about which he tFaHD knew nothing
Mr.. Kenny. he Boyer) told witness, was
down on the A. p. A. and was discharging
Protestants. Mr. Boyer told witness that
if there was no truth in the publication he
would correct it, hut he Boyer) was under
the impression that the article was true.
rs the article true?" Mr.. Jeffords asked
mo, SIR" he answered; not one word of
it is true
Witness said he had been in Mr. Kenny's
employ about five years, and had never
heard him speak of the question of relig-
ion. Since the publication Of this article in
the United American witness had made in
quiries and learned that there We're twen-
lrc,
this city, and twenty-one of them are Prot
estants ard eight are Roman Catholics
Witness held personal interviews with
some of the clerks and learned of others
through the anagers of the stores
MIR. kenny's Denial.
Mr.. Kenny was next sworn, and he made
a wholesale denial OF the charge. He said
that the question of religion never figured
in the question of the employment of clerks.
1.-THE question of religion said witness
has o more to do with the employment
than has the color of his hair"
Witness says he is Roman Catholic.
So far the alleged notice is concerned
no such notice was ever posted in any Of
his Baltimore stores to his knowledge.
He Bought the Paper.
Douglass Syphax testified that he pur-
cha sed at the office of the United American
a copy of the paper containing the alleged
libel.
Edward johnson testified that two weeks
ago. several days after the publication of
the alleged libelous article, he went with
the preceding witness when the paper was
purchased. He went there at the solicta-
ton of Mr. Fant.
John Linden. cigar ard newspaper dealer
at 631 G street, was called. He sells the
United American at his stand, but he could
rot say that he sold copies of the paper
containing the alleged Ibelous article.
Mr.. FAINT was recalled and asked by Mr..
Jeffords If he had seen copy of the United
American of August 10, one week after the
alleged libel
Mr.. Nauck objected to this testimony be-
cause these publica tions were not charged
in the warrant.
Mr.. Jeffords said he wanted to offer these
publications to show malice on part of The
publisher.
The court ruled that such testimony was
Tot admissible and a recess was taken.
Col. Cook Takes IA Hand.
After recess Mr.. Jeffords made the an
nouncement that his case was closed, and
Mr.. Nauck said he would put the defendant
cn the stand.
There was an objection made to going
into the trial of the case. and Col. Cook
made an argument in support of his claim
that the facts did not sustain the charge.
During the course of his argument coun-
sci SAID that SO far as he had been able to
discover, Mr.. Kenny only charged that the
damage, if any had been done, was a
pecuniary one. and not that it affected his
standing in the community in any matter
whatever. He read and discussed the ar
ticle which forms the basis of the prosecu-
tion and claimed that there had been no
violation of law. This accusation, he said,
constitutes no libel in any sense of the
word
Boyer Held.
Mr.. Jeffords, for the government, spoke
only a few minutes in his efforts to en-
tighten the court and read authorities on
the question of libel. In conclusion, he
said that the paragraph referring to Mr..
Kenny as d boycotter was sufficient to
maintain the charge. Judge Mills, in dis
posing of the case, said that there were
really three questions before the court. The
first was. whether or rot libel had been
published. The second was, whether or not
the defendant published the alleged libel,
and third, whether or not the publication
was one that would have been permitted.
In discussing the case the judge said that
the article has been denounced as false and
was calculated to array against Mr.. Kenny
a class of people In the community who do
not agree with him in the matter of re-
lgion. The case, he thought, was clearly
within the law of libel. and he would there
fore hold Mr.. Boyer for the action of the
grand jury. Bond was fixed at $500.