The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-06-25
WHITES|OE LIBEL SUIT
Arguments Heard on the Defend.
ants Demurrer.
A MOTION TO STRIKE OUT
They Want to Exclude All Matters Re-
ferring to the Bribery Scandal at
Helena Taken Under Ad-
vlsement

Judge Lindsay yesterday heard argu-
ments on the motion and demurrers of
the defendants in the Whiteside- Miner
libel suit. The motion was to strike
from Mr.. Whitesides complaint all
matters relating ito the bribery scam
dial at Helena and also some of the al
legel libelous matter published in the
Miner. Two of the trustees of the Miner
Publishing company also demurred to
the complaint on the ground that they
could not personally be held responsible
for what was published in the paper
Frank e. Corbett appeared for the de-
PENDANTS and Colonel w f. Sanders
and t. T. Walsh of Helena for Mr.
Whiteside.
The motion was taken up first, and
Mr.. Corbett said that all that was
necessary to be set out in a suit for
libel was the matter published and the
allegation that the person whom it con-
cerned was libeled and damaged there
by and that the publication was untrue.
The historical matters leading up to
the publication Were immaterial, Mr..
Corbett said, and all the allegations of
affairs at Helena, charges of bribery
in connection with the election of w.
A. Clark as United States senator, mad
no business in the complaint and should
be stricken out. The attorney said
that the range of the trial, if conducted
under the complaint as it stood, would
extend through the entire term of his
honor on the bench and continue until
his successors would resign in disgust.
Under the allegations of the complaint,
said Mr.. Corbett, it would become ma
terial to prove that W. A. Clark was a
candidate for the office of United States
senator; that Charles w. Clark and
John B. Welcome were his accredited
agents for the purpose of advancing his
candidacy and that Welcome paid
$50, 900 over to Whiteside for the pur-
chase of votes. If those things are ma
terial in the. pleadings, it is material
that they should be proved. Mr.. Cor
bett also wanted some of the allega-
tons regarding the published articles
stricken out because he claimed, the
matter in the articles was not libelous
under the law OF the state. During his
argument, Mr.. Corbett remarked that
personally he did not think it was a
vey bad thing to wear the insignia of
Marcus DAILY or to be charged with do
ing so; certainly it was not a libel I'M
der the law.
The demurrers of A. H. Wethey and
Alex j. Johnston, trustees of the Miner
PuDllShlng company were also argued
by Mr.. Corbett, and he contended that
trustees were not personally liable for
the wrongful acts of the corporation
unless they actively participated in
such acts. In concluding his argument
Mr.. Corbett said the complaint failed
to allege that Mr.. Whteside was dam
aged in his business, or that he was
subject to public ridicule and contempt,
and was caused to be Stunned, and un-
less he was thus subjected or damaged
he was not libeled.
Mr.. Walsh, in replying to Mr.. Corbett,
said the question of personal liability
of the trustees was not now up for de-
termination, for the complaint alleged
that all the defendants Jointly publish
ed the libel, and the plaintiff therefore
had the right to introduce his evidence
going to show that they We're RESPONSE
BILE. Mr.. Walsh said that on the gen.
eral proposition of responsibility of
trustees he would rely at the trial upon
the recent decision of the supreme court
in the case of Cameron against the
Kenyon-Connell Commercial company,
under which it became the duty of the