Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-06-25
Massey SUIT.
Commenced Yesterday in The Norfolk
Circuit Court.
LARGE crowd ~ ATTENDANCE.
1cnrinR OF the CounScI-trgumcn
On Both Sidcs--Di1icuity In Sc
curing ~ Jury--nooLs of n Bank In
E,idcncc-ThcW Witnesses.

~, X trenlS pftNt14ns.
Itisa suit IN which the plaintiff claims
5000 damages for a publication or Sc
ries or publications rejecting on him In
his official capacity. which appeared IN
The Pilot on December 23d, and many
Gays afterwards.
The suit is brought not only against
lhe corporation which publishes the Pilot
bat against a number Of the directors
Is well, who are stockholders. TWO views
nre held relative 20 the responsibility oi
stockholders for damages FOR hoclous
Publications. one Is that no liability
attaches beyond the fun amount OF stock
chat may De hcld i'm the corporation
and The other Is that where stockholders
a a paper have knowledge Of puhic''o"S
which a plaintiff deems hhclous the law
limiting the liability Of stockholders Tor
debts contracted by the corporation 10
thc amount Of such stock does nol op-
,lv-that Judgment may be entered up
Against individual stockholders as well
Is against the defendant company.
The case was FIRST called May 'H',' 49,
after q legal battle between counS'l, We.
continued until to-day. Ia the interim
a.. Tcf.udants filed a murrtrs 90 the Gee
,larstfon. which were argued ana over
ruled. and special pleas. which were ALSO
argued and cj,Ctcd. so That to-iHN Wv
caso began on the defendants plea 10 we
general issue. and OF Justification
LARGE CROWD PRESENT.
When re case was called iu che cor
,.oration-Court room. the largest lN l".
'lS' ".'S 49,, 1,e .ryi..s crowd who
- f., 49, ,t,t vas o. Doe s..t
- - ,,-a. ,o DE done Trofes-
49, -, ,,er,bants mechanics. W.T.
t''ii'' s,,r.,rs were crowded together.
.lt''.'' On - -,... ,,s~-n Dut tr.~ seem q
we "'"'''' ~ .s., .r,.,f
L. nave =, 80 49, tf.- Afr Massey. was
"e pa "a. ~. tf. cofin.,i-Nr. John
l.'s'n', rt.,'.r4 ,laIl.. ANA Nlr g. D..
-. f.., tr. defendants. the ZION.
nom 1tise J-tr- James E UDtt1.
49,, L, t1..tt dr. sam SIS. Small. Ar'
:, !, r,rI Appeared.
A. ,'r7t- ,rNrp-
49,. ....,. .s ..,-
The Neniie I'0' -, ,r. hist
lecttd To oe 5'.-~.' 3D., ,,... ..t,. .r1-
cter drawn 10Y ,.......t'a sine
oI"el"S' az '' ~ '. t...1 character urI
s".t,.-. s,,-s,-.-. VINO arc competent 10
,,e.rb wien ut.e.al intelligence the tNi-
g.,... i'm Inc ..,.. ana Gu render q verdict
d, ....rl4r.. th,r.w.tl. Tho following
is ,ba v.r.rs. ~ d. T. Davis. Is. j. Is.
slaurht.r Samuel ~. 10 ises. NJ. M
Ftadtar. .. T.. Iaw auuere. W. w. runs
G,lree TAFT. Walter J.. Irvine. John y
N,.rr.n. Ge.rc. e. E.d. William W.
1rarcrerlaNuc n g. IlUpIig y. VI. os-
t.r-a = a N.r-J.u. j.. q. Womb.e. w.
" Vicar b. h. In.tl. N. l.. Eur". g.
L. Jenkins j. j. LAWYER. George 81. lel'
ID a.. La-siter Pc StrIiWich. B.. j.. Guy.
James So. HutDr Sluausat hoAer'
I'rrt. Grc. nwooI. r. Henry Jones. W.
:, .fayo. a. a. pollard. William b.. Tay-
rrf IA ID
This list WAS exhausted. and a1 aili-
,flral li-t of t.yrrty names was prepared.
The following. Questions. prepared hy the
counsel ANA submitted by lhe Judge.
were asked each juror on bis No.r dlre-
Are you aware tht' - Is claiuei tiai
this case has been Uaae Tie subject az
political discussion ly certain public Jour
uals. AMI chat the ,togt has ur % made
Go make 10 Cd matter o. p1riy concern
li so' are <"'' '"" 'I.''',"' 80,
'i'. f't N'" 49, , ,ef..,e
on iae law ans inr li'I. 'N ,"-
"-''.. Gag -'.t...t ,,,,t.-o
i-'t '" - '. .,-.,.,,....,.
PLEA cps toNol iitA'l.
SIS lille th" supp.eM'nidl N-HlIe WIS
being summon. '' 'i- OF. '..'''.''7' ,'' '"-"
their o'uh. James j. il,"'". IT..
le-g'1 leave 'i ile court I'D H'' ann nII
fie a special plea. charging conspiracy
between 4. IS. Womack. representative
of thc American Book Company and the
lion. Air. Massey Without arguing the
Il-J or masking amy comments on it Wnai-
ever NJ lt,aih htpihitied l TO .Ju1E
IIcnus.
Mi wake OF pid'htlI 8 counsel lil-
l"''l'i'F arose ana needn q I'ntihy ai-
euwehi against me admission oi lht plea.
III" claimei mat u was plea az justin
cation. but That be does not really amount
q. grch "a Vl.a. and henc, WAS insufficient
b. was inconsistent In that. although the
ihcllous article changed the direct take
ils al money "' the bribery. the
pea "'lt.i 10 $40" o'htt hIdehffS
IMAM 'Htl "i mon 'l' ana th'i Dc was "a
departure from the declaration ami the
courts.
hr. Wake ls considered one OF tho
Wy best counsel Do the state on the sub
't.t OF pleas. ana MS argument. though
~ % decidedly technical character, was
Mr. Heath Ir f.uoo.c5 d, a 20.
words in support ~ The plea. and ne was
followed IN tho same line 10y Mr.. Wise.
MP WISE SPEAKS
~ t....t4 a. D.. -.
a.. 49, - '' 60. 90 VIZ ,''s H"'''-'
49,. -. ~, nav ,'.'', w
g,"".H "''W''h 'he non. nit. MASSEY
'f''-itttNf anna ttI' tNlil'I tilil ifIi'A