The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-02-19
THE ARGUMENTS MADE TODAY.
ULM NEVER heard THE AG-
NOSTIC STORY.
NO MALICE IN THE PUBLICATION.
Requests OF Each Side Made to the
Court in the Matter of In
structiOns.

2:30 p. m. yesterday. The remaining
hours were consumed by the attorneys
for plaintiff and defendant in arguing
In support of their respective requests
that the court deliver certain charges
to the jury.
When Judge Bum opened court at
10 a. m. the galleries were filled and
all chairs on the lower floor were Oc-
cupied as on the previous day. Quite
a number Of attorneys were among the
interested specta tors Of the novel suit.
j. s. Vandiver,, the writer Of the al
legged Hbelous screed, resumed the
stand, and Mr.. Pierce, of counsel for
the plaintiff, continued his cross-exam-
NATION. 1t amounted principally to a
cross fire Of sarcastic repartee in the
course Of which Mr.. Vandiver conveyed
the following information to the jury:
He had ascertained from parties in
New Ulm that Mr.. Lind was in the
habit of delivering Sunday evening
lectures before the Turner's in New
Ulm. Mr. Vandiver said he had no
reason for emitting to publish the
name of the PAPER from which his arti-
Gle was alleged to, have been copied.
lie did not sign, the article because he
knew his signature would be cut out
by the paper and would therefore rep
resent a waste lof ink
On redirect examination by Mr..
Mum, Mr.. VaEdiver explained why he
| had not in his article used the exact
language Of the people he had inter-
viewed in New Ulm. 1t was not custom
airy to do soLLs and furthermore he
could not be shorthand writer. He
declared, however, that he had not per-
verified the facts nor misquoted any
body. d liz
Mr.. Mum then called H. F. Black,
the managing editor of the paper Mr..
Black testified that he had sent Mr..
Vandiver to New Glm to Investigate
MIR. Lind. Mr.. 'Mulfen, the New Ulm
banker, had during the campaign,
brought matters to the attention Of
the witness, and among them was
report that Mr. Lind was a hypocrite
Mr.. Vandivers report satisfied Mr..
Black that the statements regarding
Mr.. Lind were true. On cross-exami-
nation the witness related his CONVEX
ton with Mr.. Mullen.
Mr.. Mum introduced in evidence the
copy of the New Ulm News containing
an article headed John Lind and His
upon the defense rested.
The plaintiff, I'M rebuttal, placed Rev.
Emil Seeger on the stand. Mr.. Seeger
is minister Of the German church at
Port Washington, Washington. He
lived in New Tim from 1894 to 1896,
was we'll acquainted with John Lind
and had often met and conversed with
him. Witness was asked if he had
heard Mr.. Lind say anything derog-
atory to Christianity, but upon objec-
ton of the defense, Mr.. Seeger was
not allowed to answer, the court hold
ing that the defendant was allowed the
defense of privileged communication as
well as justification and mitigation Of
damages.
he was acquainted with Mr. Lind's
reputation, the witness answered that
he was and that, he had never heard
anything to the effect that he was an
infidel, an atheist or an agnostic AS
far as the witness knew Mr. Lind had
always entertained the view uttered IN
his speech at Minneapolis On cross
examination, Rev. Mr.. Seeger said that
he had not heard Mr. Lind talked
about. His congregation knew that
Mr. Lind was not an inf1del. Had he
been an atheist the witness was sure
he would have heard of it. Upon fur
Their cross-quest oning the witness said
he had once heard Mr.. Mullen speak
of Mr.. Lind's. beliefs.
G. A. Ottomeyer, who said he had
resided for fifteen years in, New U1m,
testified that he had known Mr.. Lind
for that PERIOD and that so far as he
knew, Mr.. Lind, was not regarded as
an agnostic. Mr.. Lind had contribut-
ed to the churches, for the witness had
collected from him., He had heard Mr..
Lind's religious-view talked of during
the last campaign. but couldn't recall
the name of any individual who spoke
of the matter, unless it might have
been the pastor of witness church.
Pastor Meskey. of Prescott, Wis,
1891 to 1893, knew Mr.. Lind we'll, he
said. and far as he could judge. Mr.
Lind's reputation. was good generally
There was a general belief that he
was Turner" testified Rev. Meskey
"but it did not represent his views
His life and habits were not incon-
sistent with the Minneapolis speech"
On cross-examination the witness
said he had not heard any one dis
cuss Mr.. Lind's religious views since
1893 His knowledge was based en-
tirely on what he learned during his
residence in New Ulm from 1891 to
1893 Mr.. Meskey admitted that he
had heard the subject discussed during
his residence in New U1rn, and that
people had inferred that Mr.. Lind was
an atheist because he supported Prof
Nix, who was an avowed atheist.
Mr.. Pefferman. a New Ulm grocer.
who was a member of the. school board
and council Of that city. testified that
he never considered Mr. Lind an
atheist though he was we'll acquainted
with Mr.. Lind's reputation. Neither
had witness heard that the people sup
posed him an atheist. because he was
a member of the Turner's society
Jacob Klausner. of New Ulm. had
known Mr.. Lind for TWENTY-FIVE years
but never heard. Tthat. he was an
atheist. or
George Graft, Of New Ulm, Roman Cath
Ollie testified that he had never heard that
Lind was or was not an atheist. He didn't
know anything about Mr.. Lind's religious
views. and had neRer heard them discussed
Mr.. Lind had; eontyibuked to the building Of
the Catholic CHURCH sometime between the
years 1890 and 1898, during which period he
was at one time Candidate for congress.
S. A. Joyce. of New Tfm who sad he had
known Mr. Lind for fifteen or twenty years,
declared that LindCwas not an atheist. He
had not heard hiSfIIeligious views discussed
but had heard people say Mr.. Lind was not
an infidel. Witness fpally admitted that he
had heard it said, that, Lind was an atheist
because he was Turner.
Charles L. Roos, Of New Ulm, testified that
he had once told n G.: Hayes, of the Sleepy
Eye Dispatch that Mr.. Lind was Turner
but that he had &ever1said to any one that
Lind was an unbelfever.
Harry Black being recalled, testified that In
publishing the alleged libelous article. he was
not aetuated by any malice or ill will towards
Mr.. Lind. ... > a...s....
This closed the testimony. On motion Of