Evening star., 1901-06-01
ALLEGED NEWSPAPER LIBEL
LIVELY HEARING OF CHARGES BE-
FORE JUDGE SCOTT.
Mrs. Alexander Appears as Witness
Against Messrs. Elliott
and Hayes.

William J. Elliott and George P. Hayes.
publishers of the Sunday Globe, were today
arraigned in the Police Court on the charge
of criminal libel. The warrant was sworn
out by Victor ]. Becker brother-in-law of
the complaining witness in the case.
1t was alleged by the prosecution that
intimations contained in an article printed
| in the Globe to the effect that she had
acted In an improper manner on a stated
occasion. were false.
The first witness was Mrs. Victorine
Alexander, a clerk in the office Of the sixth
auditor for the Post Office Department, to
whom 1t was alleged the offending words
were intended to apply. She told of her po-
sition in the auditors office, and said there
was lady there other than herself
whose initials were V. A., the letters used
in the article.
Mr.. c. Maurice Smith, counsel for the de-
fense asked Mrs. Alexander if she was a
widow and when her husband died.
Witness replied that her husband was
dead, but she could not tell the exact date
of his death, which occurred in North Car
olina.
Mr.. Smith inquired if she had not heard
that she and others had been promoted out
of their turn. She had not, she answered.
Mr.. Smith maintained that there was
| nothing in the article of libelous nature,
ana tnd(, III any TaIe, the paper naU Il
right to criticise any one holding public
office.
Prosecutor MulIowny replied warmly that
he conceded the rights of the press to dis
cuss public persons, but not in the Man.
ner charged in the case on trial, in which
the language used was, he asserted. the
most outrageous that had ever come under
his observation He asked that the arti-
Gle referred to be admitted in evidence.
Judge Scott decided to sustain the posi-
ton taken by MIR. Mullowny. and Mrs.
Alexander was cross-eXamined by Mr.
Smith. In reply to his questions she de-
MED that she had ever ttckled Mr.. b. w.
Holman, whose name also appeared in the
| article, under the chin, on the nose, or any
other place, either with her finger or with
a lead pencil
Division Chief InterroEated.
Mr.. r. NJ. johnson, chief Of the division
in which Mrs Alexander is a clerk, testi-
fed that the latter is the only Mrs V. A.
| In his division, and that as he was leaving
the Post Office Department Saturday after
noon last he handed by boy a
"dodger'' which contained the words,
"Tickled Under the Chin-Widow Alexander
of the Post Office Department Claims Libel
and Arrests the Editor and that it was
stated that article on the subject
quoted would be among the features of the
paper to be printed the following day. This
"dodger' he gave to Mrs. Alexander.
While Mr.. Johnson was on the stand MI.
Smith referred to the witness as the pr1n-
cipal person referred to in the article.
At this point Mr.. johnson said to Judge
Scott that he must protest against being
referred to in any such manner. He had.
he said come to the court in response to
summons from the regular officials and
thought he was entitled to protection from
the court.
Judge Scott said that the position taken
by Mr.. johnson was correct and that Mr..
Smith must not again refer to the witness
as he had.
Further Questions.
After rather lively colloquy, In which
Judge Scott, Mr. Nj l.llowny and Mr. Smith
participated, the latter asked Mr.. johnson
if he had not designated certain persons for
promotion.
Mr.. johnson said he declined to answer
the question on the ground that this was
matter which rested entirely with the audi
tor and Secretary of the Treasury. Mr..
Mullowny also objected on the ground that
the question was irrelevant, and the mat
ter of designation had nothing to do with
the allegation that the complaining witness
had ticked Mr.. Holman under the chin.
After some further remarks by Mr.. Smith.
Judge Scott said that the question before
him was whether or not a libel had been
printed.
Counsel for defense again asked Mr..
Johnson if he did not designate Mrs. Alex
ander for promotion.
Mr. MulloWny again objected but said he
would withdraw his objection provided the
interrogatory also comprised the question
IF he did not designate the lady for the
higher position because she was said to
have tickled Mr.. Holman under the chin
Judge Scott said the subject of whether
any one had tickled anybody under the
chin had nothing to do with the question as
to how Mrs. Alexander came to be pro-
NOTED.
Mr. Smith asked Mr. johnson If he was
not the chief of his division, and, receiving
an affirmative reply, wanted to know about
the designation OF certain people for pro-
motion, and asked number of questions
bearing thereon. To each of these ques-
tions Mr.. Mulowny objected and Judge
Scott sustained the objection.
Detective Frank Baur, who placed Elliott
one of the defendants under arrest, stated
this fact. Elliott interrupted to say that
he was the sole owner of his paper and
that Hayes was hired by him.
At this point the court took a recess until
l o'clock.
Arguments in Progress.
Upon reasse n bling at 1:20 O'Clock this
afternoon Prosecutor Mullowny began to
read at length the article which contained
the alleged libelouS words, when Mr. Smith
interrupted to say that if permitted to go
upon the stand his client would be willing
to make statement which he thought
would have the effect Of acquitting him of
the accusation against him.
Mr.. MulloWny objected to the course sug-
gested by Mr. Smith and the court sl,s-
tained his objection.
Mr.. Smith followed with an argument tn
show that the alleged libelous article was
written with the view of reaching out and
striking a blow for reform, and that instead
of condemning the writer of the article
ne ought to be commended therefor
After Mr. Mullowny and Mr.. Smith con-
GUIDED their arguments Judge Scott took
the case under advisement
Hotel Arrivals.
Arltngton-W. c. Fritz. st. Louis; F. O.
Johnson, Los Angeles, Cal; w. A. Walker.
New York
Willards-Joseph E. Willard, Fairfax.
Va; r. N. Wallace and wife, Frankford.
Ind.