The Bolivar bulletin. (Bolivar, Tenn.) 1888-1946, 1902-08-29
Thomas G. Patrick Sues Edward
Boyle for $4,000.

An echo of the famous Boyle vs.
Boyle litigation was heard in tn,
Circuit Court yesterday when sui
was instituted by Thomas G. Pat
rick, of Hardeman county, agains
Edward l.. Boyle. Damages in thu
sum of $4,000 are asked on ths
grounds of libel. The plaintiff ii
represented by Hon. Chas. A. Miller
and Gen. Geo. B. Peters.
No declaration has yet been filed
but the supposition is that it was
the testimony of Edward L. Boyle
given in the litigation referred to
above which precipitates the pres
ent litigation. Bond in the pres
ent suit has been made by General
Peters and Chas. Miller.
During the hearing of the Boyle
case in chancery there was great
deal of interest shown in the testi.
mony and before the close was
reached the feeling of the contest
ants was very bitter over the char
acter Of evidence admitted. Edward
Boyle and his brother, Chas. Boyle,
resented certain imputations against
their father brought out in the dep
ositions of men who had known him
in the early days of his career before
he had amassed the fortune which
he possessed at the time of his
death.
In one instance the deposition of
Thomas G. Patrick, of Bolivar, was
introduced. 1t was this deposition
which created a sensation in the
hearing. Patrick stated that he had
known Boyle in the early days,
knew him during the war, knew
him when he was a poor man and
had been his partner in malY vent
ures. One of these escapades re-
cited was when faro game resulted
in several Federal officers losing
$685. 900 in game banked by Boyle.
This part of the testimony was fully
and deliberately given. Patrick
stated that he told Boyle that there
were several Federal officers with
money who wished chance TO go
against the bank and that it was
agreed between them that they
would club together against bank
roll and that game should be start
ed. This resulted as stated above.
When Edward Boyle was placed
on the stand he was asked by his
counsel what he thought of this tes-
timony and he replied that it was a
lie. There was an intense stiffness
in the court room at the time and
every one listed to see if he would
qualify his statement but he remain
ed positive. Later he said that he
had always believed this story to be
a lie and that he knew that Oscar
B. Polk had invented it and had in
duced Thomas @. Patrick to swear
to it, and that he regarded it and
has always had regarded it as being
maliciously untrue.
Later on in his testimony he in a
measure retracted his statement but
the sting of the lie still chung to his
testimony or to that part of it which
implicated Thomas G. Patrick, and
it is this which has called forth the
suit of that gentleman.
Thomas G. Patrick is now well
advanced in years and is quite an
old man. His deposition was a most
interesting recital of conditions
which existed prior to and during
the war. He recounted a number
of incidents which were most pleas
ing 10 those who were interested in
the late war and episodes connected
with it, and the relations of the
deceased, Col. Boyle, with the aft
ant were regarded very close at the
time both lived in Bolivar. Thomas
G. Patrick now proposes to show
that he did not misrepresent the
facts stated in his deposition and
that for the allegations against him
he is entitled to damages.-Com-
mercial Appeal Aug. 90.