The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-10-18

Before court ad1ournS today the case
OF the commonwealth against Richard
j. Little and NJ. ]. OToole, who are
charged with libelling Colonel e. II.
Ripple, will be in the hands of the
jury.
All of the testimony is in and this
morning Attorney John II. Lenahan
will make the closing argument for
the defendants. Attorney Joseph
o'Brien will argue the case Of the
commonwealth and after Judge il. NJ.
Edwards charge the case will be given
to the jury for consideration.
The intense interest taken in the
case was shown by the great crowd
that thronged the large court room
all day and watched the progress of
events with the greatest interest,
When the court opened in the morn
ing Judge Edwards ruled that the
iibelous articles under consideration in
the case on trial We're not privileged
communications and therefore re-
fused to admit the evidence
1t was proposed TO offer with
a view to justlfying the libel.
Against the earnest protests of the at
torneys for the commonwealth, how
ever, he decided to admit testimony to
rebut the inference of malice which
could reasonably be deduced from the
language of the libelous articles.
FOR THE DEFENSE.
Then the defense called a number
told Little that they had heard
that Colonel Ripple had used
money in politics. This for the
nf
in good faith in printing the articles.
The first of these witnesses was John
J. O'Grady of West Scranton, who is
now employed on the ScrantCnian. On
the stand Mr.. O'Grady swore diametri-
cally opposite to his sworn testimony
in the Langstaff election contest He
also admitted that he had served time
in the county Jail.
The other witnesses who had given
hearsay information to little were
Cha IS Teeter, of Green Ridge,
ex-MaS or John H. Fellows, Wade
NJ. Finn and Mayor James Molr.
These are the men from whom Editor
Little said he got his hearsay in
formation about Colonel Ripple from
and on which hearsay information he
based the Infamous articles that are
the basis of the libel suit.
When on the stand these men admit
ted having talked with Little about
Colonel Ripple and politics but none of
them would admit having said any
thing that in the slightest manner
would excuse the language of the ar
ticles. Editor Little and Reporter
O'Toole were the other witnesses for
the defense.
nd NIT nA hot he . l,o
iibelous editorials contained in the
scrantonians of July so and Aug. 6 and
at the suggestion of his counsel swore
the articles were printed for the public
good and not because he had any mall
ice toward Colonel Ripple. He denied
all malicious intent and said he had
the highest regard for the prosecutor
as a private citizen. All of this Little
swore to, but not without some hesi-
swore to, but not without some con-
siderable hesitancy and manifest
stress of what there is left in him in
the place usually occupied by mans
conscience.
LITTLE ON THE STAND.
1t is many days since such a spec
tacle was seen on the witness
bNHHN All eAAo NouAAlS Us i@illls pIeStUl6u
when undergoing the raking cross-exL
animation of Attorney John +. Kelly.
Judge Edwards frequently had 10 re-
mind Little that he must make his
answers responsive to the questions
put to him by the attorney. He hem
med and hawed and squirmed but al
ways came the relentless Mr.. Kelly
with his relentless. Answer my ques-
hon, please or You understand my
question, don't you" and after Little
had exhausted his efforts at evasion
the answer had to come As a confess
sion TO reckless and wholly irresponsi-
BILE methods of conducting a news-
paper Little's testimony undoubtedly
itands without a parallel in the history