Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1900-05-29
Mr.. GRETHER
Replies to- Cleveland
Leaders s Article.
Claims That the Facts We're Mis-
represented.

To the Editor: If ever the Cleveland
Leader published an account of any
thing misleading to the public, it did
so in Saturdays issue in the article
headed, "Ae Verdict of $1.OO Against
ii i'm
This item pertained to an action or
the U. s. Circuit court, brought by
one Brodbelt against John Grether. of
Akron, o., and which was heard and
decided Just one week previous to the
publication of the article in the Lead
er
Evidently the truthful account Of the
case. published in nearly every news
paper in Northern Ohio week before
was distasteful to the Central Passen-
ger Traffic Association Crhe railroads,
and as warning TO the public, ana
to forestall any future actions by in
dividuals against similar transgres-
sions of II. Il. Co.'S, the Leader pub
fishes this misleading article, in which
every important feature of the case
was misreprcscnted, and leaves the
reader to infer that it was a grand vic
tory for the II. Il. IS, when in truth
ii was just the opposite.
The account does not stop nj petty
misrepresentation. but even goes so
far as to misrepresent d judge of the
u. S. court. That II newspaper hav-
ing any regard at all for truthfuncss
and Justice can publish an account of
Il case in the Z. $. court. and come so
far from the real facts, I cannot con
ccive. especially when the complete
records of the case are right under the
noses of the reporters
Ii is too evident that some one 9th
er than the reporters of the paper had
hand in the article. The article
charges daliiance with ticket brokers.
The court records will show that
went directly TO reputable law firm
for advice, and the charge that u de-
tcctive of the Ticket Brokers Associa-
ton had me in tow, is absolutely
false and misleading. The reader is
left To infer that refused to sign my
name third time when III fact it was
fifth time. | signed my name on the
ticket al Akron, then upon dcpos;tlng
the same at Chicago, s'gDeG my
name or the envelope. in which it was
filed away. When called for the
ticket the following day, ! was asked
TO sign the receipt had presented.
which | did, then was asked 10 sign
the ticket again, which did.
This made four signatures
of mine that Brodbclt had be-
fore him, two of which were made in
the fourth time, he asked me to sign
again OH a pnd of paper which | re-
fused to do. He then refused TO give
me my ticket and | had him arrested
and locked up.
To LET the plaintiff down easy, ana
that the laugh may not be SO hard
OH him the article states that he sued
for 81 900 damages and got Si.00. The
truth is. he sued for $4,000 and got
81. 90. Then the article goes on TO say,
that Mr. Grcther will have to pay the
costs.
IL the Leader will consult the stat
utcs It will be found tnat in actions
for damages for malicious prosccu-
ton. where a verdict of less than $500
is rendered, the plaintiff pays his own
costs.
Last hut not least, the article says
that Judge Clark instructed the jury
to find the plaintiff, when is a perni-
cious falsehood.
Judge Clark nor any other judge ever
charged jury with greater impartial
ity than was shown in this case.
All the above statement can be YER
fled by the court records in the case,
and if the Leader has any inclination
to be fair 1t will correct Its blunder,
otherwise | shall take II for granted
that the article was purposely publish
ed to mislead the public.
In conclusion, | desire to say. that
would bring similar action against any
railroad employe tomorrow under like
circumstances.
Respectfully.
JOHN GRETHER.