The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-03-12
||BUSB::|'l CASE I J |
H..|V'..E|ARINCE|:|V'l'
Expected That a Verdict Mil be be
II Reached 'To-dayii1% This
Interesting Case.
\ INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN I:l\
AftcrHthe Submission OF These u, csc
4. Argument Begins and; and Will w
Conclude This Morning.


s, M, IA of The usby-Dnwson ct ais
Esrasc is IN sight
EysA XII h o'clock yesterday evening 1nuse
N1nrrnm interrupted Mr.. Wiliiam -
MiI3oynll5 during his remarks TO me july
HAnd Nr Royal, rs he wiped ING l y. ~
NINE from his brow. seemed gau on ~. I.
NISfsstf Nm, wish to close this evening,
Nsa,d ihn Judge, ..wc will not adjourn Just
NnbH..' \, j, I, ~, Al.
S5tNo: Id JUS soon 20 ovcr, replied M
@@9r,nvnli and The whole crowd felt easier,
HMith possibly tho exception Of the p ~
#ctr,als to the suit, as Sherlll El'ps VI W
&clared tho court In recess, /, i, 4. .yua
nThe Jury Will no. thih W 80 4
VITA any one said Judge ingram.
IaH,The 4 tendance upon the hcaulns yes
Etcrf1av was the largest of the trial 3ga
Mj3fThere vas q large representation llo MUM,
Mthe bar. and the business men OF ti r'
Ecity8wcrc out III force. .s. III. :. I. y 5
THE INSTRUCTIONS.
The instructions were read TO ne Ne .1ui y
H5shcn8 court convened short l'5 ul'ei ~
Epu'clock They were as follows:
HE Ma + III the Jury believe from the cylde ..t
Etbatthe defendants conspred toEother 70 run
1.-The plaintiff BY writing an sG"J, June IS 1so
H.nd signed Harry Marks which Is desrr 81 e.,
Hin declarations and has , been proaHjjd
Htha,S ,iefendants sent said letter 70 some on
1.-The plnintins creditors and thav tnG s W.,
, thsIr Feiist s hoS Be for ant
Nah assessing his damages they may HIN s.,damn,
ss das s. shda hss a acted aaiously
Hn;anton and reckless disregard q lis ,i..''
inlay ce f,su the Evidence
AIhst the defendants wIo;s ,he , tertsI ,hicS
RJ une is. iask and signed Harry arS M M ,n
H,,r1sIiFasi Il, evidences With dishonest purpose
sand Intention and iha, they mailed INC same
i,Isinnsst rI,ose or intention and that
s,t va 81 received hy them. then they are ~,
ILL., iifsi for which tbs efeniauts IRE rasnonsi-
#bleEso3 The paintn and their Sernist sl,on,a us
or na - -, pes IL thae
Aissst fran the evidence thar the 1sishnh ,
,sssd salciousir or u. wanton ana
ts5iss,f malice 49,;
o II the Jury i,ciieye from The eniasnos
Irvra the plaintiff instructed the ceienohht.
Hla,,,.,trrs to write q letter 70 the creiito %,
ief the plaln,iT. stating . theIIi MAJ me
4:sat ntiant, Blo1nbsI g. because OF sau
s.sssTttsS ,S letter SCI out and described In the
Aieciasaifona dated June is. laQ6. and signed
.sJarrs and to man II 70 thies Or 'lgse
saeceised ard read nj that Inc actlqii n WA.
sish;if q THE said parties was Win q disnohsst
sa ..s aS.t ali tntse tao defendants arc
I-piits Of publishing ibel fer whcn the9 aIs
IsaI.sn Ia nj cxpse, Il letter ia be wrt,cni
ai,sy strnpE ternlF rs are used in said letter, and
s.ss,n t anS pIanl IL damages tie jury
IrraSsE How punitive damages y .they DeLs.e
sseniuct Mere actunted by malice o. or were
aGI,ity OF a wanton and reckless disregard
4pf,!he plaintiff, s rights u i, ~. cor.
Hspiras can be proved by 2circnn,stantial as wei
ns by direct testimony and the burden OF nrooi
Has lpau the plaintiff TO prove the conspiracy ..,
Mty preponderance Of evidence. but the jury
are instructed that the gist Of the action Is Is
I,alonc is never sufficient 10 support an action
H 10. l. Tho jury are Instructed that they may
HIND for one Of the defendants and against Nv"
8iicf them. and that they may also hnd for TWO
is No 6 The court instructs the jury that the
S5Gprden OF proof In this case is upon the PLAIN
II iii TO establish, by !. preponderanee OF evidence
,9.Sery material allegation Of his declaration,
1.-The court further instructs the jury thai .
jHcomnon design or purpose by two or more per-
NJ sons is the OF the charge OF conspiracy
Hand before the jury can find against the defend
Siants In this action for the conspiracy CHARGED
aislnnds Of two or more OF the defendants met
ssand agreed upon the plot Of conspiracy ser
s3fcrth in tho declaration, and they must further
,believe that said plot or conspiracy was ex-
Executed and that plainth sustained actual
81 as atsa q
sffsaid plot or conspracyrr -" 8t
Sss But the jury arc Instructed thatfthc declara-
sss,tion In this case charges n conspiracy of tho
III defendants 10 injure the plaintiff and the pub
HflIcation Of libel in execution thereof, and the
injury have thr right, under the declaration, 70
b#iind against the defendants for the libel. al
Although they may not believe the conspiracy
sHlthe damage to The plaintiff and mot the con-
aS1ederslton and combination OF the defendants.
siB No.7. The court instructs the jury IL they
81 believe from the evidence that the letter Of the
Sst5Iy Blsby 10 Dawson on the l7,h Of June, 1908.
absence
Etathat j. was procured by fraud or deception
Aspracticed by Dawson SO that at the time Of Its
lHdevery TO him the said Dawson knew that
SHsBushy did not know OF iis contents by reason
Ell of the fraud or deception pncticed, the said
ecats with him such agents and counsel AZ ie
might select and the plaintiff Is not entitled lee,
HRcts OF the said Dawson his agents or asso-
NE;ciate counsel done in good faith.
EEIthat on or about the 18th day Of June 1902,
EEsthe defendant Bloomherg was approached by
a 30 sSyss nG A
Mplan,if. for the purpose OF relieving him
kEtrom his financial embarrassment, and request.
bhied the said Bloomberg 70 assist him In said
I&undertaking ~ endcavorng 10 secure control
3ot the accounts against tho said plaintiff; and
iidf tho Jury further believe from the evidence
Mthat the said l3loomberG, in good faith and
Mleiying upon the aforesaid representations OF
Hthe said Dawson. which representations of the
t3Faid Dawson the Jury believe from the evidence
lite have been true as made by him to. said
Hwrite The letter OF June 49, 1903, for the purpose
EISd securing the said accounts, then they are
ti3nstTucted that they cannot find verdict
HRgaInst the said Bloomberg for any damages
iIalfged 70 have been oceasloned by reason OF
1.-THE said letter OF June Is, 1903. notw,hstand-
saing its imputations be false. or founded upon
ssa the most erroneous information. And II the
III Jury believe from the evidence that relying
Nippon the abatement Of the said Bloonberg thai
td he was associated with Dawson, who was al
siirrney for Rusby, and that Dawson was atlor,
III ney for said Busby as stated by Bloomberg
ia The Defendant Marks in good faith wrote nnc
Unpublished the aforesaid letter. then they ar,
siSins'ricteh that they cannot find n verde
s:5aEanst the spid Marks for any damages q /
ARGUMENT BEGINS,
NiAtnr some liltle sparring for som,
Hiinles Colonel James started thing
sssping, aud those who had chairs leadce
EEiaek comfortably In them, prepared Il
EssIieaf some good addresses.
HE Colonel James consumed less than al