Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1903-01-11
STARTLING TURN
IN TlNGLEY CASE.
Owner OF Times OF Conspiracy.
Suit for $4,000 Damages.

Suit for $4,000 Damages.
SAN DIEGO, CAL, January. Nv lille
Mr.. Slortridge was closing. the argument
for the defendant In the Tngley-Times
libel suit, a sheriff's deputy stepped into
the courtroom, and served upon General
Harrison Gray Otis, president Of the
Times Mirror Company, a summons in
an action for $4,000, brought by Mrs.
Katherine A. Tingley, alleging that he IS
a party to a conspiracy with his city edi-
tor, Harry Andrus; a Times reporter,
named Lanier Bartlett; Mrs. NJ. Leavitt,
the woman who gave. the interview upon
which the pending libel suit is based, and
E. w. Schn1itt to biackmail and extort
money from tbs plaintiff.
SAN DIEGO, CAL, January 10-Wit1l
the courtroom packed to the limit of its
capacity, with people perched in window
slls, and an immense. throng struggling
to; gain positions in the remote part of
the corridors, Samuel NJ. Shortridge, of
San Francisco, began the closing argu-
ment in behalf of the defendant in the
Tingley-Times libel suit to-day.
Mr.. Shortridge said: WHO is the
| plaintiff in this case? Whence does she
come? Is her past not shrouded in mys-
terry? She stands on the record as Kate
Tingley, suing the Los Angeles Times
The legal personality Of the defendant is
! known Who is this plaintiff of unknown
past -?
Here Mr.. Andrews, Of the plaintiff $
! counsel, objected to- the inference that
Mrs. Tingley had an unknown past.
/ MIR. Shortridgez was allowed to proceed.
i and he insisted that Mrs. Tingleys past
was unknown, because it was allowed tc
be shown to the Jury.
OBJECT MONEY; NOT yINDICATION,
Mr.. shortridse enlarged upon the free
.om of the press, and declared that the
object of the suit was money, and nCy
! indication. AS to the charge that, Mrs
-flngley had suffered damages, he asked
Is, there any evidence that her following
mas fallen off: that any of. the earnest.
out misguided women who cluster round
her have been driven from her side; that
any Of the, loyal subjects who do her bid
|. ding have deserted? Has her crown been
aiken from her? Has her see ire been
shaken? Has rebellion broken CIT in he.
Kingdom? Has there been disloyaItJ
among her ladies in waiting, who lift
her royal robes, although they were
much to sacred for human touch?''
Speaking OF the mysterious power
which, he said Mrs. Tingley exercised
over others. Mr.. Shortridge said: eve
see tull-grown men proud to surrender
their individuality, willing to become her
subjects, willing to appear as servitors
in her royal retinue.
GOES BACK TO DARK AGES.
Whether we call the men feeble
minded and the women earnest and sin
cere, the fact remains that the power
this woman exercises is extraordinary
and repugnant to the spirit Of American
ISM Instead. it goes back to the dark
ages, and to foreign countries; it seems
that She snatched her sceptre auc
grasped her crown from the dead. She
claims to be the successor of Madame
Blavatskys and William O. Judge. sue
cessorS self-appointed. She has taken her
seat on the: throne. and American citt,
zens are proud TO do her bidding. It i
extraordinary She is vested with life
tenure, and with power to appoint her
own successor, and with power. to cas-.
into outer darkness such members Of her
Organization as come under her displea.
sure ltsis a power autocratic, un-Ame,E.
can, and un-Christian; yet, revolving AZ
ut IS, there are those who seem proud
to be her subjects. No despot Of Con
stanf1nople# ever claimed to exeycise such
power over men and women as Mrs.
Katherine Tingley does, and strangest. of
all, she does it with their consent,