The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-01-26
RETRACT, YE SCRIBE
The Fergus County {" Argus" L
Squarely in the Legal Swim.
VROOMAN SUED FOR LIBEL
He Gives the Plaintiff to Under
stand That. should He Win. the
Spells VIII NJ OF Make Him Rich
The Editor Stands Pat.

---- Great Falls, JAN 25.-William Fink
5-teiner of Lewistown has instituted a
~lbel suit against Editor Vrooman of
rahe Fergus County Argus, alleging
damages In the modest sum of $4,000,
by the publication of an article reflect
ing on the character of the plaintiff.
The complaint alleges:
% THAT John NJ. Vrooman has been
and now is the editor. proprietor and
{ publisher of the Fergus County Argus;
that on or about the second day of
January A. D.. 1895, at said county and
state, the said defendant published
among the news items in the local col
umns of the regular issue of his said
newspaper an article which was read
by divers and numerous persons,
portion of which contained words of
and concerning this plaintiff, which
were printed and published by the said
defendant with slanderous and libelous
intent to injure the honesty, integrity
and reputation of this plaintiff, and
expose him to hatred, contempt, ridi-
cule and obloquy, and which were as
follows, to-wit:
Reputable citizens say that they
saw Finkbeiner going through the
pockets of a drunken man who was
lying on the sidewalk, and that they
further saw him take something from
the pocket of the man and put 1t in his
own, where certain bills were after
wards found apparently thrust in with
great haste, as shown by their crum-
piled condition. Finkbeiner's victim was
afterwards heard to tell him that he
was short the amount found in Fink
beiner's pocket. On the whole
he was treated with great leniency and
we do not think the public viii censure
nhe sheriff's Office for arresting a man
caught in the very act of relieving an
ether of his valuables. - -
That the said publication was. and
ts false, unprivileged and defamatory;
exposed the plaintiff to hatred. con-
tempt, ridicule and obloquy; caused
i'm to be Stunned and avoided; had
Z, tendency to injure plaintiff in his
occupation. That by means of said
false and defamatory publication the
plaintiff was, and is, injured in his
reputation to his damage in the sum
of IS, 000." Wherefore plaintiff demands
Judgment against the defendant for
the sum OF $1,000. as above stated, and
his costs herein expended"
Referring to the suit, edltoriaily, the
Argus says: THE Argus published the
exact facts in the case, just as 1t had
them from eye-witnesses. We have
every reason to believe that the wit
nesses told the exact truth, and that
they will testify to their statements on
the stand, df the plaintiff and attorneys
have the nerve to carry on their black
mailing suit. One thing we will give
then plainly to understand: They will
extract no money from the Argus un-
less at the end of the suit and after
judgment in their favor.
THE Argus does not intend to do in
justice to any one, neither will it sub
init to any matchmaking scheme. If
Finkbeiner or his attorneys will prove
10 the Argus that Its account was in
correct 1t will cheerfully and fully
make reparation. This they have not
even offered to do. Until they do this.
we will stand pat. We make this offer
publicly; now let them adduce their
proofs. If they cannot or will not, the
public will not be slow to form an opin-
lon adverse to their case, and If Mr.
Finkbeiner and his attorneys expect
to get rich over the division of the
spoils we forewarn them that they are
liable to be disappointed