The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-06-08

The feature Of the second day of the
trial of the case Of Former County At
,torney Samuel Az Anderson against Ed
ward N. Saunders, to recover $4,000 for
alleged libel, was in, the testimony of Mr.
Saunders that VIZ, Cochrane, who tes-
titled to having written the alleged libel
Gus interview, had never obtained word
from him, The defendant declared on the
stand that he had positively refused to
be interviewed when Mr.. Cochrane called
to see him, and that he knew nothing Of
the article in question.
When court opened :. in the morning,
Judge Flandrau, of counsel for the plain
tiff, read to the jury the alleged Hbelous
article. Then he asked Attorney Sey-
mour, representing the, defendant. to stip-
ulate that Mr.. Anderson was not renoni-
mated for. the office of county attorney.
This was; agreed to and the plaintiff rest
ed. ,5. ,,e;e..
Then came the first: Of long series Of
arguments over technical questions re-
lating to the Introduction and the ma
teriality Of the evidence. Attorney Sey-
mour asked for dismissal on the ground
that the exact words used must be prov
en-, and the principal witness for the
prosecution. Mr.. Coehrane, had stated
merely impressions. After some time
spent in arguments, Judge Kelly denied
the motion, and Attorney Seymour open
ed to the jury. The plaintiff, he said.
had delayed In, bringing the suit until it
had come almost within the statute OF
limitations. It would be shown that
Saunders knew nothing Of the alleged lib
eIous article until nearly two years after
the publications.; that he had refused to
be interviewed. qFurthermore, the coun-
sci was prepareefto- show that Mr. Ander-
son had been very angry at the time in
question, and had said he wanted nothing
more to do with that grand jury.
mo county attorney ever violated his
duty in the manner that Anderson did
when he allowed himself to be interview
ey by the Pioneer Press declared Attor-
ney Seymour. RFt,7d
Then the Defendant was called to the
stand, and sentencenby sentence denied
having inspired the article that was pub
lished. foTI8 z.t-:.: 49,
MIR. Saunders. &testfmony was interrupt
ed with two hours Of argument as to
whether the defense gould deny the arti-
Gle and then attempt to show justif1ca-
ton. The court fheld, that 1T was admis-
sfble. and the defendant resumed the
stand. He oenfedl9in toto the testimony Of
the reporter. Cechrane had been to see
him. but only remained about a minute
and a half. y $50 .st# 49,
II did not tell him anything. not a
word he said. 7so ~, +~
Frederick DriscolI, who was foreman
of the grand jury of which the defendant
was member, testified as to Anderson S
statements. The county attorney, he
said, had been very angry and excited
when he said he had nothing more for
that grand 5ury.':5 Ss ,s.qqfssN 9>;-fe::}
The plaintiff, called IN rebuttal to1d=the
court that he was not angry and excited
but had simply; plainly and mildly stated
the situation. He had said there was no
use to present any more cases to the
grand jury beca usei 1t had failed to find
indictments on the evidence he had pre-
sented, and which were his strongest
cases. 1890 SF7' 1900
Hermann Scheffer and ID. ferguson,
who were members of the grand jury.
both testified that the plaintiff had not
said anything out of the way to the grand
jury, and had not f1lsulted' that body. -.
Judge Flandrau for the plaintiff, and
Attorney Seymour, for the defendant,
summed up to the jury, and the case will
be concluded today after Judge Kelly's
charge. * 7ts1-f -'-. :.