The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-07-07
SCRAPPING DOCTORS
The Everett Wilkinson Ii
bel Suit Comes TO
Trial at Last.
EMINENT COUNSEL IN THE CASE
Dir. McCarter Rehearses the Awful
Damage Done to the Character
and Feelings of His Client.

The libel suit of DR.. John r. Everett
against DIR. James Wilkinson is on trial
today in the Supreme Court before JUS
tice Lippincott. Lawyer McCarter OIL
Newark appears for the plaintiff and ex-
Senator BrinlSerhof for he defendant.
This case has already gone through sew
eral legal stages and has been widely
advertised. On August s, 1896, Druggist
Lewis r. Wright, who kept g pharmacy
at jackson avenue and Forrest street,
received an anonymous letter, in which
a bitter attack was made upon Or. Ever
ettss personal and professional character.
Wright showed the letter to DR.. Everett,
who at once concluded thatsit was writ
ten by DIR. James Wilkinson. DR.. Ever
EFT started out on the warpath. He laid
complaint before the Grand Jury in
this county. but no Indictment was found.
Then he went before the United States
Grand jury and tried to have Dr. Will
kinson indicted for improper use Of the
United States mail, but failed there also.
Finally he entered the libel suit in the
Supreme Court.
In the opening Mr.. McCarter read the
letter to the jury. He said that this was
not a case in which broken limbs could
be exhibited to excite the sympathy of
the jury, but it was a case of a marred
reputation, which was dearer than life or
limb. MIR. McCarter told the Jury further
that DR.. Everett has lived here all his
life and has acquired a name and repu-
ton: that the defendant is just as prom
inent; that DR.. Wilkinson. out of a NAL
ignity of spirit which car hardly be ac-
counted for wrote a most dastardly libel
against the plaintiff, and that it was done
in a way which was calculated to do the
most harm; thai an anonymous letter is
the most cowardly kind of an epistles
that DR.. Wilkinson, an educated, cultur-
ed gentleman, assumed Ignorance and
want of culture in writing the letter in
order to hide the hand with which he
was stabbing the plaintiff in the back;
that the letter bristles with libel: that
it practically accused DR.. Everett Of hay
ing caused the death Of two patients,
Pemberton and Sterrit, by the improper
use of choral and morphine.
There is the case of poor Sterrit,'s
the letter read. "You know fun well that
he killed him and he will kill you, too.
II you dom lock- out! He has poisoned
your mind against your best frieftle.'
The letter went on to advise Wright 70
get rid of Everett, n said that ne
kept respectable customers away from the
store, and that his presence is a curse
wherever he goes. Wright is advised to
renovate his back room and have no
more rum there, no more midnight orgies.
"AIl the doctors IKE you" the letter
went on, 'but don't like him He never
attends Sabbath school, never leads III
prayer, and Is never in decent company
except in your store. He has brought
you to your present financial straits
The writer then speaks of the scene at
Sterrit's bedside and said that he was
with Wright there. He says there was an
awful look on DR.. Everett's wife's race,
showing her fear of her Brute % a nus
band. He tells Wright that he is in
fatuated, hoodoed, and that he is the only
man who Will allow Everett in his store.
The writer, in a postscript, says that ne
has written to DR.. Everett asking hin
not to take advantage of Wright's weak
ness. He said it was q case of d man
of virile instincts winding a pueriie mind
around his thumb, and in his letter to
DIR. Everett he had asked him to relent.
Mr.. McCarter said he proposed to prove
that DR.. Wilkinson wrote the letter and
he would ask the jury to give the plain
tiff substantial damages.
DIR. Everett was the first witness called.
He said he was IS years old and had
been a practising physician since 1872. He
is a graduate of the Long Island College
Hospital. He knows DIR. Wilkinson, who
is a physician in good standing, and IS
acquainted with his handwriting. He rec
ognized a letter addressed to Mrs. Won
IerScHnlQL as DeluS III IT.. w A1hiiASJHS
handwriting. It was written on April IS,
1899. He also recognized a letter which
hi had received on August 8, 1885, as be-
ing in the same handwriting. It was ad-
dressed doc Everett" addressed him as
.sFriend." and was signed Homeopathic
Patient" The libelous letter was shown
to him and he recognized that also as be-
ing in Dr. WilkiTson's handwriting.
On cross-examination he said he had
not received a letter from Dr. Wilkinson
with his name signed to it in ten years,
~ 49, -
because he had seen it on prescriptions
and certificates. The case was on at re-
cess. The defence will be that DR.. VIII
kinson did not write the letter.