The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-06-06
Verdict Rendered According to In
by Mrs. WoOdbury's Counsel.
TESTIMONY OF THE PLAINTIFF
ANOTHER TRIO OF INITIAL LET
TIERS INTERPRETED IN COURT.
Mrs. Woodbury. Admitted She Never
Practiced "M. A. Co. which Means
'sMaliciOus Animal Control"

BOSTON, June ST have examined this
libel with great care. both while the argu-
raents were going and during the trial.
think the plaintiff has sustained her case,
as 1 have already intimated, upon the mat
ter Of publication. AS regards the position
OF the church, there is no evidence that
no one there understood the alleged libel as
applying to the plaintiff, so that she could
not recover damages upon this count, be-
cause she has shown no injury from it.
Taking the libel itself. l see nothing which
can in any fair way be said to indicate
the plaintiff In the first part of the libel.
The only thing in the libel, it seems to me.
which can by any reasonable interpreta-
tion be said to serve as means of identif-
ton are the words widow and widow
hood which occur in the latter part OF
the message. i have come to the con-
clusion that even that reference does not
absolutely identify the plaintiff, and ii
seems to me that the plaintiff has not made
out a case here which 1 can let so to the
jury. / shall. therefore, be obliged to or
der verdict for the defendant
With these words. in the Superior Court,
Judge Charles L. Bell this afternoon
brought to a sudden and unexpected end
the famous $4,000 libel suit brought by
Mrs. Josephine Curtis Woodbury.. of Bos-
ton, against Rev. Mary Baker Eddy, of
Concord, n. H., the founder and present
head of the Christian Science Church.
A few minutes later the jury which had
been excluded while arguments were being
made, was summoned into the courtroom.
After explaining briefly the cause for this
course, Judge Bell ordered the jury to find
for the defendant, which it accordingly
did in the usual form. Counsel for Mrs.
Woodbury. filed exceptions on all the ques-
tions passed upon. They have not yet de-
cided on a definite course OF action, but
authorized il to be stated that they expect
TO carry the case to the Supreme Court.
This far-reaching decision of Judge Bell
was given in response 10 one OF two mo-
tions offered by Mr.. Elder senior counsel
for Mrs. Eddy. asking that a verdict for
the defendant be ordered the evidence
as ii stood. The other motion, which was
not sustained, was that the two counts in
the declaration referring to the publication
in the two Christian Science periodicals be
stricken out.
When court opened to-day Frederick w.
Peabody, attorney for the plaintiff, began
his argument. Taking up the question as to
by Mrs Eddy, Mr. Peabody said: Mrs.
Eddy is the autocrat of Christian Science
and has full power over the church and
publishing society. When Mrs. Eddy de-
signed the publishing house of the So
trines of Christian Science as taught by
her she left it to their discretion as to what
should be done with it,.
Elder in replv said that Mrs Eddy
had relieved herself of all power by con-
ferring it upon the trustees. and the by
laws admit that 1t is only on very impor-
tant matters that she is consulted.
Judge Bell ruled that the testimony of
Mrs Helen NJ. Winchester given on this
point yesterday could not stand. With re-
gard 10 the letters which Judge Bell took
Tor discussion as TO the admission. he de-
cided that they should be admitted evil
dence.
Mrs Woodbury. was the first witness to-
day. Mr.. Peabody at once plunged into the
mysteries of Christian Science, some of
which developed in yesterdays evidence re-
gardng correspondence between Mrs
Woodbury. and Mrs. Eddy. Taking up a
communication from Mrs. Eddy. in whicn
main outside of the First Church of Christ
until she had ceased TO be controlled by
M \. M" interpreted malicious animal
magnetism), counsel asked the witness If
she ever practiced m. n. c." which is
understood TO mean malicious animal con-
troll" Mrs. Woodbury. smiled she an
AT this point question as to Mrs Wood
bury's children brought out the informa-
ton that she had three-a daughter of
twenty-fOur son or twenty-three and a
son of twelve years.
Mr.. Peabody devoted considerable time to
efforts TO show the relations existing be-
tween the followers of Christian Science
and Mrs. Eddy. AT every point the lawyers
for the respondent interposed objections
Some of these were sustained and some
oNerruled, an exception being taken on
each ruling. One question admitted by the
court was, What is the belief of the mem
bers of the First Church as TO Mrs. Eddy,
its foundress?
Mrs. Woodbury. answered: 1.-The members
believe in the infallibility of Mrs Eddy
and of science and health, and that Mrs
Eddy is woman especially designated by
God TO reveal the work of Christian
Science"
There was a protracted contest between
the attorneys over question, the purpose
the church believe Mrs. Eddy was an in
strument used by God TO perform His work.
Mr.. Peabody made repeated attempts 10
formulate a question covering the subject,
but each time he met with objections which
the court sustained. At length the examin-
ing lawyer gave up and Mrs. Woodbury. re-
tired. as the other side did not desire 10
ask her any questions.
Ira O. Knapp, who testified on Monday.
was recalled, and in reply t. '1estions by
MI. Pea body SAID ne ulu not low tnat
Christian Scientists who listened 10 the
reading OF the alleged libelous message un-
derstood Mrs Eddy 10 refer 10 herself
when she used the words. "A woman ap-
peared in the heavens clothed with light"
He did not know that the members believed
that Mrs Eddy was sent from God.
Margaret Burns. a bachelor of Christian
Science. said that she did not think of
any one when she heard the words for
she saith in her heart l am no widow"
she did not believe that the quotation re-
in IN WOODBURY.
Counsel for the plaintiff announced that
he wnnld -. .ha case Mr. Elder onened