Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1904-12-15
Judge Platt Sustains q Motion
to Direct a Verdict For the
Defendants
MILDLY SCORES ALL PARTIES
lntimates That the Ex-Priest Was
Probably Guilty of Perjury and That
His Injuries Were More Fancied
Than ReaI-upholds Right Of Free
Speech.

crnndv Center, Dec. 15.-Tfe case or
Rev p A. Seauin VS.. Murphy, ct. al,
the sensational damage suit 1or per-
sonal injuries, brought by the eS-
Catholic priest against Mr. Murphy
and fifteen other prominent citizens OF
Dixie. in which $4,000 was asked Tor
injuries alleged to have been sustained
nv Seeuin at the hands of a mob when
he was delivering lecture at Dlke a
little over a year ago, was brought 10
an abrupt close today, when Judge
Platt sustained motion of the defense
to take the case from the jury. The
court gave both sides his views on the
case in a short address following his
ruling on the motion.
The plaintiff rested his case shortly
before noon today, and the motion TO
take from the jury was Immediately
made by the defense. The court sus-
tanned the motion without hearing any
evidence of the defense, and in an ad-
dress Of about fifteen or twenty min
utes in length, directed to the plaintiff
himself and the defendants, gave his
views
To the defendant and the people of
Dixie who were present the court stat
ed that they must not forget that every
one had the right of free speech, but at
the same time he did not uphold the
plaintiff in delivering a lecture that he
knew would stir up trouble. To the
plaintiff the court said that he believ-
ed he had perjured himself, in that he
complained Of the destroyed hearing In
one ear. The court said he thought
the nlaintiff could hear as, well as any
lone else. Another instance of perjury,
in the mind Of the court was in the
claim Of the plaintiff that he had been
permanently disabled. The court said
that he considered the plaintiff as well
as he had ever been. He might have
been injured at the time, and probably
was. but when he was on the stand the
court considered that the plaintiff had
exaggerated his injuries. He thought
that If the plaintiff was desirous of
doing some good, he could do more
good working for some church rather
than against the church. On the other
hand, however, in directing his re-
marks to the defendants, the court
said that he did not think the Cath
olics had the right to interfere with a
man who wanted to say what he
thought.
Tom III. Miner Of Belle PLANE, had
charge of the case for the plaintiff.
and Williamson & Willoughby, Of this
city. and j. B. Sullivan, Of Des Moines,
looked after the interests of the sixteen
defendants.
His testimony was not very strong
and he could not identify any defend
ant with any overt act. He appeared
very hard Of hearing, but was caught
time or two off his guard and could
hear better than he pretended. He
told a terrible tale Of brutality, but
upon close questioning weakened con-
siderably. He testified that before the
Dixie affair he was man in perfect
health and that his teeth were in per-
feet condition. Upon cross -examina-
ton it was shown that two weeks
prior to the Dixie affair, Seguin, testi-
fed in an action against the C. r. L.
& p. r. r. Co., at Albert Lea that he
then was in a nervous collapse as re-
suit of trouble up there and that he
was then suffering from his teeth
where they had injured him there. It
was clearly brought out that he had
testified there that his physical condi-
ton was very bad and the two weeks
later claimed to be in perfect health.
His testimony showed that he never
had his broken arm set by a physician,
and only treated it with liniment; that
he went home and stayed there two
months without having physician.
He stated that he had home at AM
boy for ex-priests and that he had so
ran it for six years. Upon cross
examination it was shown that he
never in the six years had had but
one inmate and that this inmate was
there but three days. So much for his
alleged home for which he raises so
much money.
He was followed by George Jepsen
who testified that the defendants and
others came into the hall without pay
ing admission. But further than that
he had not seen. He was followed by
Frank Billman who was also there all
the time but could not identify any
Of the defendants as having done any
overt act
Next came N. A. Nelson, who saw
some of the defendants and testified to
their using obscene language, but he
also saw no overt act. HI. Shultz was
next used and he likewise saw no overt
act and heard no obscene language
used.
MANN STATE CONVENTIONS.