The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-12-02


had any authority or power to
investigate charges against the president
of the college, and that so far as APP
pointing Oglesby prosecutor, they say they
offered the place to Clark and tried to get
him to take it and then tried to get two
others to accept it. Mr.. Southgate testi-
fed that afer making this effort to get
Judge Clark to prosecute, and after Judge
Montgomery and several others had de-
clined they appointed Mr.. Oglesby be-
cause he had experience in church trials
and was a competent man to undertake
the matter Again they say that the
evidence before them was sufficient to
conclude ard they might very well have
concluded that the statements of DR..
Kilgo, while a little exaggerated, were in
the main true and borne out by the evil
dence That on the charge that this man
was the original maligner it was dis
closed that he had spoken to two or
three men about Kilgo, that the charge
that he was a hypocrite, was borne out
by the evidence; that while he was re-
ceiving Kilgos patronage he had gone
around and spoken. to several persons be-
hind his back and that the charge was in
the main true, and that there was suffi-
Another circumstance they ask the jury
TO consider as tending to show that they
acted in good faith is that they published
everything that took place, both for and
against Kilgo; that they published Judge
Clarl's challenge to the jury severely
arraigning the position of the trustees,
charging them with being so biased
against him as that they could not give
hi IN 4rio hot
letter of Kingsbury; that if they had had
any design to injure Gattis they would
have published only what bore on him, but
they put in everything else whether it
helped or hurt, and they ask the jury to
consider all these things. That they pub
lished these proceedings only to give the
public a correct account of the entire
trial to put the college in fair light
before the public and let them come to
true conclusion about it. Dea
They also call your attention to the
evidence that witness after witness said
that Kilgo was a man of high standing
in South Carolina and among them the
bishc2.
Gentlemen, if you answer these two
issues no. that is that the statement
contained in Kilgo's speech were not
false, or if you answer the third issue
no, that the publication was not malicious,
you will not award any damages to the
plaintiff. II, however, you answer the
first three issues yes, that is that the defa
matory matter was published and that
the same or any material part thereof is
false, and also that it was published not
in good faith for the reasons claimed, but
for some wrongful indirect or wicked mo-
tive, then you will consider the evidence
in respect to the fourth issue What
damage is the plaintiff entitled to re-
cover?
The amount of damages is largely in
the discretion of the jury, and you will
award what in your judgment is fair
compensation for the injury done this
plaintiff in his calling, if traceable to this
publication, and also damages to the bust
ness in which he was engaged, which can
be traced to this publication, and award
him also what in your judgment is fair
compensation for the pain ard suffering
caused by the defendants wrong as
result of this publication. The testimony
of the plaintiff is that he was engaged
at that time in selling books under the
patronage Of the North Carolina con-
ference, that his business was worth to
him something like $1,000 year, that
in 1893 when this charge came out the
business had reached larger proportions,
that it was larger than at any time since
he had undertaken the work; that in
1898 the business had recovered from the
panic that he had larger stock of goods,
and was making better sales of his books.
that after this publication his business
fell off, patrons ceased to buy, and he
found he could not sell at all and finally
his firm went into bankruptcy and he
had to give it up, he further testifies that
he had no such position from the confer
ence: that he was not able to get the same
kind Of charge, and one witness says that
when he did get one he lost it on ac-
count of this controversy, by reason OF
this publication and that he had lost his
power to do good among them, until they
asked the conference to send him some
where else, that his power for good was
lost, that his calling had been destroyed.
The defendants ask the jury to consider
that the business was not prosperous,
that he admitted that at the time of
this controversy he owed $4,000 or $4,000
and so far from being prosperous in bust
ness he was insolvent, that he was super
animated on his own request, that his
character was passed. anu lie WAS put OH
the superannuated list, and he says him
self ne went to the conference and asked
them to give him quiet place, and that
they gave it to him. and they contend that
there is no evidence OF treatment of him
by the conference different from what
it would have if the publication had not
been made, that he was treated with con-
sideration and respect, that the reason
of his retirement was at his own request.
These are the contentious of the plain
tiff and defendants on the question OF
damages and you will consider the tes-
timony and award him what in your judg-
ment is a fair compensation for the in
jury that has been done him, if you so
find
If you find that the publication was
done in ili-will or reckless and wanton
disregard of the plaintiffs rights in addi-
tion to compensatory damages the jury
may award punitive or exemplary dam
ages, that is you can put on an additional
amount to punish the defendants II you
find that this publication was done from
personal ill-will towards Mr.. Gattis or
reckless and want of disregard OF his
rights.
This is all deem it desirable 10 say
this 10