The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-12-02
GATHS Is GIVEN
TWENTY THOUSAND
Continued from Fifth Page.)

| CT your crCuence! Read his testimony
and mark his lodging
| 1t is contended by the plaintiff that this
publication was slanderous, and that it
tended to bring him into rdicule and con-
tempt and iniure him in his calling. and
| they say the charge amounts to a charge
| that he was the original slanderer and
maligner and that he went about talking
unseemly gossip, and again they say it
amounts to the charge that he was hypo-
critic, and that he kept store where I'M
| Christian gossip was retailed so that
decency required that DR.. Kilgo keep
away; that between a murderer and a
maligner of his fellow man. he would
prefer to be an assassin that Gattis did
not desire or intend to tell the truth, and
that truth has small opportunity in his
hands.
! The question addressed on this second
| issue is whether the defamatory matter
| contained in that speech or any a ma
terial part thereof is false. On the part
of the plaintiff Gattis takes the stand and
| swears that he was not the original ma
| ligner of DR.. KilgO; that he did not orig
/ nate this charge; that he only spoke of
| it to Judge Clark in private conversation,
and at Judge Clark's urgent instance,
| that it was after the charge had been
| mooted and Clark was on his return from
| Tennessee. where he had been looking
/ for evidence: that he did not give him any
names; that no names he gave Judge
Clark were used on the trial, and that he
| spoke only at the instance of Judge
| Clark under a pledge of secrecy. That as
to his being a hypocrite and talking about
| Kilgo to Peacock, he says that his state
nent to Peacock was when he first went
TO South Carolina Conference, when there
was this demonstration over Kilgo, and
| that before he had again spoken to Pea
cock in the way Of detracting from Kilgo,
| it was three years after this first state
! ment when the association between him
and Kilgo had become cold, and they
| we're having very little to do with each
other when this statement was made;
| that since the time of the first state
ment he had found out what was the true
standing of Kilgo in South Carolina, and
that it was that of a wirepuller SO
far as having un-Christan gossip over
his counter he testifies that he has never
permitted it; that so far as he knew no
such conversation ever took place, and
chat so far as he understood it he has
not gossiped about the brethren of the
cloth or laymen or other citizens. And
as further evidence that what he said
was true to Judge Clark, and that he was
not the original maligner, there is the
evidence of Judge Shuford, who testifes
that in 1894. about the time DR.. Kilgo
came to North Carolina. he was in Spar
| tanburg, s. c.; was there at different
| times that it was where his wife'S peo-
| pie lived. and she was sick there that
spring and he was there at one time as
| long, as six months, and being a member
/ of the Methodist church and knowing
lIilgo had been elected president of Trim
| ty College was attentive to what was
! said about him. From various persons
| he learned they said this defendant was
q wirepuller and manipulation of ecclesias-
| teal bodies. and that sometimes he did
so by indirect methods.
| They say that was three years before
anything was ever heard from Gattis, and
that that had been circulated in various
quarters for more than three years. and
that all he had TO do with it was to speal,
to Judge Clark in a private conversation
under the pledge of secrecy. And they
say that the witness Lyon states that
| This defendant was in the habit of manip-
| alating there.
| They allege that the plaintiff was in
good standing and enjoying the confidence
Of his fellow man; that in their answer,
upon which they joined issue, the
defendants did not deny mis-. That
the 1st and 2nd allegations are not de-
MED; that it amounts to a practical ad
mission that this man was not the kind
of man that the speech of DR.. Kilgo
said he was. Again they ask the jury to
consider the fact that large number of
witnesses have spoken to his character
manning them) some fifteen in all, both
ministers and laymen both Methodists
and members of other denominations have
| taken the stand and testified that for
forty years he has gone in and out among
the people and has always borne the
character of a high minded man.
On the part of the defendants upon that
second issue, they ask the jury to consider
the fact that so far as the evidence
discloses the defendant was the only man
who ever gave Judge Clark any Informal
ton defamatory of Kilgo, that he was
the only man practically who testified
that there was any charge against him in
South Carolina that they have failed to
bring single witness who had lived with
hllgo ana knew what KIND OF man ne was
to testify against him.
That not only from Clark's letter but
from any other evidence developed on this
trial, no man has ever heard a word
defamatory of Kilgo except that proceed
ing from the mouth of this plaintiff. and
that he spoke of him not only to Judge
Clark, but that he spoke of him in a way
to detract from him to Underwood, and
also Beaman. That according to his own
admission he was talking about Kilgo to
Peacock when he was receiving Kilgo's
patronage at his store. While showing in
every way that he was on good terms
with Kilgo, he was going around to these
people saying things defamatory of him;
that he was the only man who testified to
such facts before the board of trustees;
that Lyon and Jennings, while they said
Kilgo did endeavor to carry his point be-
fore ecclesiastical bodies in South Caro-
lima, they gave him a high moral
character. That this plaintiff Gattis was
the only man who had ever said anything
detracting from DR.. Kilgo's position and
standing That not only did he speak of
Kigo in this way. but that he spoke of
others. That he admits having said Of
Yates that he was not an efficient man