Waterbury Democrat., 1900-11-13

ant pleasantly, and the latter said he expected something like shis,, me:,n- ing, the attachment. Defendant be- came excited while the attachment was being read and abused both pf them.
 Mr Maloney was again recalled to the stand. lie testified regarding ai- legged malice on the part of the defcnt- ant. He said that some years ago de fendant asked c. ,Maloney. pro prietor of the Democrat. to takes him into partnership, and he was an SWered in the negative. He testihed also that lie heard defendant make of fensiye remarks of him while passing on the street.
 Constable Carmody testified next. His evidence was substantially the same as Sheriff Ramctti's, but rega~d- ing the defendant calling plaintiff vile names he was more specific. Attorney Carmodr was the next witness. He testified that he ma:led\ | letter to defendant requesting $; de- nial of the article. This evidence vas l objected t0 and an exception taken. l This was the first pEceptiou Colonel l Brrpec requested that rnc letter be i produced by the defendants counsel. and Judge Cole replied that he knew | nothing about it.
 (. P. Hayes was also recalled and ! stated tha5 hr beard the defendant ra- 1 fer to the plaintiff in the manner n 1 which tue latter was mentioned in the 1 alleged lihelous article. There were no"t@ of th@ article which were given hin to assist his memory that he did nOt know what they applied to.
 This closed tne casa for tho plaintiff. and the defense began with the de- fenGant nn the stand His opening i testimony referred TO the loan referred | tO above. Tie nrI1 question bore on | certain alleged reports regarding -;.,, removal of the Rev Father Mrrp.:v. | Colonel Burp'c objected OF the | grounds of iTrcIrv2DcN. and Judge Root maintained his ground on thc basis tl!Ht jhr alleged reports wrt:: rouilnpn property. n0 natter if th2y were untrue. and therefore the de- fendanl Was justified in puhlia1 1irg them. CoIonri Burnee held th.r tAe | alleged lihrlOus ar:i..ln was q privileged communication and did no- come Ur- der ihr head of news. The question H-ls allowed aHd witness went OF: that hc heard the reports and looked them mp for publication. What the rum0r actually was he was not ai- l lowed tn Say. lie said the rumor had been in circulation several years befor. the article was published. He teSti-
 
 containing the article in question Were published. because he stopped the press and gathered in all the copies that had left the office. He denied the words Carmodv and Rametti at trihutCd to him. and said the reason he refused to sign the retrIctiOn was be- cause it was unjournaliStic and drawn up-in an unusual manner. He denied writing the article or the head lines of it.
 He was on the stand at press hour.
 During int2rmission for dinner Judge Wheeler refused to order capias to be issued for the arrest of q druggist named Bennett. a resident of Bristol It appeared that Bennett re- fused to recognize the authority of subpoena commanding him to appear as witness in the case of Nellie -i. Evans against Dr William W. Horton of New Haven. on the ground that tlIe man who served The paper was a rela- tive of the plaintiff.
 The court also declined to set data for d hearing to dissolve the injuuc- ton which was issued yesterday tc Charles Miller hy Judge Pfadstree- restraining Joseph T. WhittlaScy of New Haven from building in the rear of the premises at 135 Bank street. Yesterday the preliminary work of erecting q big building was begun.
 Judge BradStreet was heard in mo- ton to erase from Ill" docket the ease of the Waterbury Blank Book Co vs W NJ Hurlhurt. This matter was de- cided few weeks ago in arbitration by Judge Root in favor ot the Blank Book O. The defendant took an ar- peal and the piaintif held there was no appeal from such q decision. The court took the papers.