The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-03-03
dence introduced Yesterday.


dence introduced Yesterday.
The case of Barnes VS.. Crawford for
s. 600 damages for libel was begun in
the Superior court of Wake county at
noon yesterday.
The pleadings were read. 1t was
alleged in the complaint that Craw-
ford and Carter connived together to
publish libel. Counsel for defense
denied any connection with the publi-
cation of the alleged libelous state
ment in the newspapers; then the
question arose, whether the publication
was sufficiently alleged in the COM
plant, to entitle them to an action for
libel
The court reserved decision on these
points until the evidence was all in.
Barnes counsel offered letter from
Crawford to Peele and Maynard, also
copy of a letter dated Oct. 20, 1892
from Peele and Maynard, attorneys OF
w. S. Barnes, addressed to Mr.. w. L.
Crawford in reply to the first letter
This was objected to on the ground
that it was only copy and the origin
al could not be produced. This letter
set forth that if Crawford would apollo
gize before the campaign closed the
case would be dropped Crawford's
letter in reply denies that he signed the
sub-treasury demand and states that
he had made no statement concerning
Mr.. Barnes in his speeches on the cam
paign. Crawford's attorneys here
object to the the admission of
the letters in evidence on the ground
that they were written two years be-
fore the present libel suit was brought.
Here Barnes attorneys introduce
the card signed by Mr.. Crawford which
is admitted by counsel for defendant
But the court refused to allow Barnes
affidavit in the Progressive Farmer,
Oct. %, 1892, in regard TO Crawford's
signing the demands, to be introduced.
The plaintiffs counsel gives notice that
they will later read the demands.
Barnes says that in 1890 when the
alleged card was signed he (Barnes)
was not Secretary of the Alliance.
Counsel for plaintiff gives notice that
in certain events they viii recall
Barnes for cross-examination.
Deposition of j. c. Brown, of Green
lee, Mcdowell county, is here intro
duced, by counsel for defendant Brown
was Populist candidate against
Crawford in the fall of 1892. Brown
states that in the campaign Mr.. Craw-
ford denied signing the Alliance de-
mands, so far as the sub-treasury
scheme was concerned. Stated that
he had had correspondence with
Barnes in regard to the suit and that
he had helped Barnes by keeping him
informed and suggesting witnesses TO
prove Barnes charge against Crawford.
That as an Allianceman he had sym
pathy and fraternal feeling for Barnes.
Col. Tllos. S. Kenan, clerk of the SUI
prelne court, testified that he had
known W. S. Barnes ever since he was
a boy and that his general character
was good. lie also testified that he
knew the general character of ex-Con-
gresham Crawford and that it was
good.
H. w Aver. editor Of the Caucasian,
also testified to Barnes good charac-
ter Being questioned as to the Ali
ance platforms he said he was not thor
oughly acquainted with the st. Louis
platform of the Alliance.
w H. Worth, State Treasurer, testi-
fies Us to the general character Of w. S.
Barnes. Says it is good.
Plaintiff S attorneys ask that the pa
pers in the former suit of Barnes VIZ.
Crawford he admitted as evidence. The
papers we're admitted.
PaInes was recalled by his attOr-
neys and asked from whom he. receiv-
ed the copy of the Rutherford Herald
containing the alleged libel. The court
excluded this question, as Barnes said
ne had no way Of knowing except that
the PARTY sending it wrote and stated
that ne sent it. (IIcre the card signed
by Crawford was read by Barnes coun-
sell Barnes says he had certified
copies Of this made TO Mcdowell coun-
tx to Mr.. j. g. Brown who was q candi-
date for Congress. lie was not allow
ed to send ont the original. A ques-
ton as 10 why the part OF the sixth
demand I'm regard to the sub-treasury
added on the card signed by Crawford
was objected To and the question eX-
clnded on the ground that Barnes
was not al that time Secretary Of the
Alliance Also the question as to
whether this part of it was put on the
card by authority OF the sub-alllances.
Said he didn't try To furnish Brown
with an original Of Crawford's card,
SAYS he didn't have time during the
campaign to write 10 the committee to
get permission To send the original.
Being questioned about the st. Louis
platform said he knew nothing Of the
Alliance platforms Of 1890. Didn't
know when the sub-treasury was first
demanded, yet he was Secretary for the
State and had been studying and prac
ticing the demands since 1899. Said
the Progressive Farmer was the Off
cial organ of State Alliance, after
great deal of evasion and appealing TO
the court that he knew nothing of how
the paper vas run. He was canyassing
for the paper in Western counties and
thinks he said that Mr. Crawford had
signed the Alliance demands and then
gone 10 Washington and repudiated
them He was lecturing on How to
prepare eggs for market"
Here counsel for defendant, in view
of Barnes testimony, withdrew their
objection to the admission of Barnes
affidavit in the Progressive Farmer and