The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-08-04
INNOVATION IN LIBEL SUITS.
PLAINTIFF PERMITTED TO MAKE
DEFENSE OF HIS ACTION.
Can Cnn Witnesses In nm At,em,.
." frove the Trath of the pub
Hcation Complained OF.

Dallas, Texas August s.-Seyeral w..ss
ago Rev. Dr. j. B. Cranield one of the
most prominent Baptists in Texas. pre-
TERED charges of criminal libel In four
counts against Rev. DR.. S. A. Hayden. an .
other widely known Baptist minister. Last
iaii Dr. Hayden published in his paper.
the Texas Baptist and Herald. that DR.
Crantlll, who is secretary OF the State
mission board of the church, had misap-
propriated church funds to his own use
publication of this allegation induced DR..
Cranhll to file charges OF criminal libel
against Minister and Editor Hayden.
Trial of DR.. Hayden on one of the four
counts began before County Judge Ken
meth Force on July 81 and. AS noted in
The Post before. is still waxing hot An
array OF eminent counsel represent DIR.
Hayden and splendid lawyers are engaged
in the prosecution. The legal struggles
have been heated and brilliant and in the
other week which the trial ia expected TO
consume there is little telling what may
happen.
The whole matter lie but continuation
oil the celebrated Cranfill- Hayden ccntro-
versy which came TO head IN the State
baptist convention at San Antonio in No
Vember, 1887, and has continued with TN
abated vigor ever since. Readers of The
fost are familiar with the whole question
upon which the Texas Baptist church has
seemed SO badly divided for the past two
years
The most interesting phase OF the present
trial, a phase which is SUE, TO interest all
'eXas aaa which wouli lie faithfully
studied by the Texas legislature is the
attitude of Judge Force toward the It'll
giants He has gone far beyond tine lines
set down by tho higher courts of the State
and by the supposed libel law, and, holding
last to what he conceived to be the right,
has dared to fly in the face of a score
or more of judges and their Opinions
Dr. Hayden did not dream of denying that !
he had published and circulated the /
charges in question against Or. Crantll /
and. his only hope of securing an acauittal
resting in proving the charges. his attor
neys at once began pleading for the ad
mission of testimony upon which they
hoped to prove Or. Haydens allegations
correct
Colonel W. l.. Crawford of Hayden's
counsel made a mastery argument from
a constitutional standpoint in favor of be- 1
ing allowed to prove the truth of the I
charges in justification of their publica-
ton. Assistant County Attorney Henry
S. Crawford and others made strong
speeches against this course and cited
court decisions in support oil
their contention. But Judge Force de- .
clered that one Texas court, at least,
would respect the constitution and that
any defendant in his court might plead
and attempt TO prove the truth in justi-
ication of the act on which he stood
charged. Hons, Dudley G, Wooten and
Lee NJ. Galloway, who represent DR.. Gran
fill. and DR.. Cranfill himself have told
Judge Force that he acted wisely and we'll
and did no more than any conscientious
and fearless Judge would have done.
Judge Force has made an innovation
in the rule of the Texas courts in criminal
libel suits and has gaddened the hearts
Of the Dallasites who have been contend
ing for years for Q law that would force
the courts 10 do just what Judge Force did
without any forcing, The precedent set
by the man who presides over the Dali
las county court is expected by Dallas at
torneys and others to have preaching
affept I