The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1903-09-19
JURY DECIDES
FOR MARRIOTT
Thomas II. Williams
Must Pay $16,7 8O
for Assault.
Iruxtun Beale Is Not In
Guided in the Yer
dict.

After celebrating for an hour and TWEEN
" minutes the jury in the damage suit Of
Frederick Marriott against Thomas II.
Williams and Truxtun Beale rendered the
following unanimous verdict yesterday
afternoon.
We. the jury il the above entitled action.
IND verdict IN favor o. the plaintiff ana
against the defendant. Thomas L. Williams.
tOr the ~ $40 TsC-
GEORGE Il ARa-sTROoSG. Foreman
The CELEBRITY with which the jury came
TO a decision WAS A surprise even To
Hiram and Albert Johnson. the attorneys
for the DlaircF. At O'Clock Albert
johnson finished his long argument
Judge Sloss read 4 set Of instructions to
the twelve arbiJers in the box and they
retired al $50 clock. In d half-hour rney
returned 10 receive further instruction
from the Judge and to seek informa ton
upon the actual amount Of the corlpen-
satory damages sought by the complaint
~ the plaintiff When their verdict was
read IL became evident that the jury had
allowed Marriott the fun extent OF the
expenses which he claimed to have been
incurred the result Of the assault com
mitte6 upon hlm- To this they added an
extra $1,000 as punitive damages against
Williams. After being dismissed the mem
hers Of the jury stated that Beale was
cleared from the charge against him on
the first ballet taken and that the effort
10 make the damages against Williams
greater was defeated as a punishment for
Marriott's permitting the scanGalous ar
ticle against Beale's afianced wife 10 ap-
pear in the News Letter.
When the court assembled yesterday
morning 10 listen 10 the closing srgu-
ments Of the attorneys Beale and VIII
lams were not present. Albert Johnson
proceeded 10 deliver his address TO the
jury, and he occupied a full hour and
half in the morning and a like amount OF
the afternoons session He dwelt on the
question Of the power OF money to sub
vert justice. and sought 70 impress the
tUry with the fact that the two million aire
defendants were confident Of acquittal on
account eof their wealth and social posi-
tion-
When ne had finished Attorney Peter
Dunno for the defendants announced that
he was ready 10 allow the case TO go to
The jury without argument for the de-
Tense Judge SlOss then charged the jury
He spoke in part as follows;
The defendants allege in this case that they
- 'mrittted the action complained II in self
defense and the assault was made under great
Trofocation. This second point in their de-
Tense goes alone 70 the reduction q exemplary
Dr punitive DAMAGES and does not excuse the
IN determining whether or not the defend
ants acted IN self-cefense you must determine
Whether or not they used more force than
Necessary In resisting attack. u the plea
nf sall-defeuse is not found 70 ne supported
by the evidence YOU must bring in compen-
earo-E damages for the plaintiff II YOU be
ilere that after having their attention called
70 rhe alleged scar6alous article in the News
Letter. The defendants tempers had time -
cool or before they committed the assault
then YOU may award exemplary damages as
punitive measure
After the jury had retired Attorneys
Dunno and Creswell for the defendants
left the courtroom. leaving Attorney c.
X. DurbrOw TO represent them. When the
5ury's verdict was read Durbrow asked
for "a stay Of execution for ten days,
which was granted