The record-union., 1897-10-10
WEIhSTOCK WINS HIS SUIT.
THE JURY DECLARES HE HAS
BEEN LTBELED.
But They Estimate the Damages
Therefrom at Only Fifty
Dollars.

Yesterday morning when Judge
Hughes opened court H. w. Johnson
resumed his closing argument in the
Weinstock- -McClatchy case.
He said that the duty of the plaintiff
was to set out in his complaint only the
matter that concerned him He has
nothing to do with charges against
others, and would not be allowed to
plead on it in court Therefore he had
conformed to the well-established rule
of pleading, and embodied in his COM
plaint only what concerned himself, and
that is adj with which the jury has 10
deal. No man can successfully hold
that the article was not an infamous
attack on plaintiff and a libel. The de-
fense tries to construe that paragraph
Ais not libel. If the paragraph is left out
entirely there will still remain ample
ground on which to prove libel. There
is no question about the libel, and the
court would instruct the jury so. The
only question with which it has to do
is the matter of damages.
Leaving paragraph out Of the ques-
ton then, and passing on to 3, we find
Weinstock charged with being asso-
ciated in the management of news
paper which had no existence, with
bOodleTs, blackmailers and scoundrels.
And he was to be elected Mayor in or
der to help them to carry out their
plans. He asked each juror to take the
article home to himself and place him
self in the place of Mr.. Weinstock. Let
him think how he would feel if, after
spending years in building up a fair
name in the community he should find
himself suddenly charged by a paper
with being the associate of thugs,
gamblers and blackmailers, and that
statement was spread broadcast over
the coast.
Would he feel aggrieved and injured?
Would he feel that it was done for
his good? If the speaker should meet
any of the jury on the street and tell
them all concerning Weinstock that
had been charged against him in this
article, would they not be Mortified at
the tale concerning a man whose repu-
tation in the community is unstained,
and on the morrow, when they found
that it was a damnable lie, what would
they think of the man who had told
them the lie? How would one of the
jurors feel if the charge were published
against him, to have the paper go home
TO his wife and children and have them
read the charges against him? Would
he feel that they were not injurious
to his character, or that he should
thank these men for helping to vindi-
cate him by publishing them? Would
Ea +af41 in
which they had held him up to the pub
lie view?
Will this jury say to these men that
they can go on in this manner Destroy
ing regulations, and that after doing so,
all they have to do is to come to court
and crawl on their bellies, and saying
to the jury that they did not intend any
libel. They have come here, and
through their paid attorneys say that
they make no charges against Mr..
Weinstock, while they do not dare to
go on the stand themselves and swear
to the statement Are they, no matter
how long they have gone unwhipped
of Justice, to be allowed to go on de-
stroying the regulations of good citi-
zens? If so. no one will be safe from
their assaults in the future and the
reputation of any citizen, built up by
years of honorable conduct, may at
any time be assailed by them and rum
ed.
The Bee" finds so and so, does it?
1t finds a lie, for the whole thing IS
a lie. There was no newspaper to be
started There was no gambling neil
to he started Won Arnold never eX-
In "a
money. except what was supplied by
those men in carrying out their netar-
ious plot. and spent by him in the
brothels and saloons, while gathering
the swilI and offal that he carried to
their office to be used in their schemes
They. never existed, except in the coun-
ellis of the McClatchys in the Bee"
office. There they were concocted be-
tween these men and their PAID de-
tectives. these shrewd detectives that
were always detailed for difficult work.
And Weinstock is not charged with
being interested in the newspaper
scheme. is he? He is not charged with
being associated with Won Arnold IN
running it to protect his gambling IN
terests. is he? OF course, it might
easily. be inferred, as the article states,
what the paper was to be used for ana
it has taken these men, who published
this damnable lie. till October 1th, all
these months, to come here and ac-
knowledge through hired counsel that
it was a lie. and that Mr.. Weinstock' S
reputation is spotless.
And Won Arnold was their chosen
agent, their confidential agent, and
went from brothel to brothel and sa-
loon to saloon, gathering material to
take to their office in order that they
might concOct this vallainous scheme in
relation to things that never were in
tended to exist, TO blacken the reputa-
tions of men that stood high in the
community.
This drunken roysterer, guilty of al
most every crime in the calendar, ex-
cept murder, was their chosen agent
in his aecursed crime. He wished he
could make the jury understand the
danger that overhangs the reputation
Of every man in the community as long
as ihese men are allowed to go on in
this way. Where is Won Arnold now,
and why do they not produce him to
testify in mitigation of the statements
they have made? Where is he, and
why IS he not here?
The portion of the article that states
Sheehan suggested that Weinstock
would take stock in the paper is a
charge that Weinstock intended to be-
come connected with the paper in or
der to protect Won Arnold's gambling
interests They have never attempt
ed to prove that Sheehan ever said
anything of the sort. and, as a matter