The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-12-14
Attorney Hadley for Defendants Main
tains They Were Justified in Sc
curing Certain Pamphlets.
ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL
LAWYERS ON BOTH SIDES MAKE
APPEALS TO JURY.
Case May Go to Jury Tomorrow
Observation-Disclosures Prepared by
Opposing Counsel.

One of the most interesting features of
the David A. Jennings damage suit for
100000 against certain citizens Of Salem,
Ind, came up in Federal Court yesterday
afternoon after the jury was dismissed with
instructions to be present in court at
o'clock tomorrow morning. Both sides OF
the suit have prepared instructions which
they will give to Judge Baker, hoping to
have them Incorporated in his instructions
to the jury at the conclusion Of the argu-
ment tomorrow morning.
One of the instructions submitted by At
torney Hadley for the defense was objected
to by Attorney Rocker, representing the
plaintiff. 1t concerned the pamphlets
known as THE Searchlight," which caused
the alleged assault. and whether the de-
PENDANTS were justified in the course they
pursued to secure possession of them and
stop their circulation
Attorney Hadley cited few authorities
and said a persons character is a valuable
possession; II is not property, but a thing
no man has a right to assail There is no
remedy, he said. for assault upon character
that will repair the injury done to the in
Jured party. He further said that If man
has the right TO defend anything he pos
sesses he has the right to use such force as
will defend what is right. He cited the
law on necessity and self-defense. The Jaw
of necessity, he said, knows no rule, but
each case must be governed by the cfrcum-
stances, and if the defendants in this case
went to Jennings for the sole purpose of
securing the scurrilous pamphlets they had
a right to compel him to give them up. as
the pamphlets assailed the characters of
the men and their families named as de-
PENDANTS in the
CASE SUMMARIZED.
Judge Baker said that the case sum-
married. was that the defendants claimed
they were justified in compelling Jennings
to give them the pamphlets. He then gave
the law on self-defense and compared 1t
with the case in question. He said when
a man raised his hand to another man
and the latter had reason to believe that
he was about to be assaulted he had the
right to knock the other man down. He
then said that knowledge had reached the
defendants in this case that Jennings was
publishing a pamphlet, that 1t was hot
and that man who had seen part of it
might be a killing. 1t was then a ques-
ton. he said. for the jury to decide whether
the defendants were justified in the course
they pursued.
Attorney Rocker claimed that before the
instruction in question could be given to
the jury the plaintiff has the right TO prove
that the charges he made in the pamphlet
were true. He said he put the defendants
on the stand as his witnesses 20 prove,
If possible, that Jennings had been waylaid
and whitecapped. He followed that course
out of force of necessity. Judge Baker
said that the plaintiff might have made his
case by Jennings taking the stand and also
by giving the evidence of Mrs Jennings
and the Jennings boy and then leaving IT
to the defedants to show that they were
justified in what they did.
Judge Baker reserved his ruling on the
question until tomorrow morning, when
both sides will probably introduce a few
authorities before the argument is resumed
The taking of evidence was concluded
yesterday morning. Jennings and his wife
a statement of Warder Stevens, witness
for the defendants, who said that the mem
party short timed after the death of
Jennings's first wife, refused to associate
with the complainant and the woman who
is now his wife
ATTORNEYS ARGUMENTS.
Judge Baker granted each side three
hours for argument, and Attorney Rocker
used about one hour sf his time yesterday
afternoon. He will conclude his argument
Tomorrow. Attorney Mitchell spoke for
over an hour for the defendants, and At
torney Hadley will use the remainder of
the time allotted the defendants tomorrow.
Attorney Rocker rehearsed the plaintiffs
side of the case and said that Jennings had
been prosecuted while resident of Salem.
He recited the many times that Jennings
had been arrested at the instance of his
enemies and tried and convicted of charges
of which he was innocent. He said that
Efforts were maze 10 break up MS nome,
and that ne was finally told that he would
have to leave Salem. The night of the as
sault was pictured as told by Jennings on
the witness stand.
Attorney Mitchell devoted most of his
time to pointing out the good regulations
borne by the defendants in the case and to
the witnesses who testified for the defense.
He said the defendants did not have to go
into the saloons and byways to secure wit
nesses to testify for them. He told of the
circumstances leading up to the alleged as
saut, when Denny Gore, who had been en-
ployed by Jennings to set type for the sour
rilous pamphlets, told one of the defendants
that he was afraid there would be kill
ing when some people read the pamphlets"
He said the defendants whose homes had
been assailed went to Jennings and insisted
upon him giving them the pamphlets, but
did not use the force as alleged by Jen-
nings. Attorney Mitchell said it was too
late on Jan. 80, 1900. for the defendants to
secure an injunction against Jennings to
prevent him circulating the pamphlets, and
they had to take the matter into their
hands and compel him to surrender the pa
pers. Jennings only turned over about Us
of the pamphlets TO the defendants and
then went out early the next morning with
a revolver in his pocket and distributed the
rest of them