The Nome nugget. (Nome, Alaska) 1901-1904, 1904-06-08

of exceedingly bad repute. He asked
| the witness questions as to the employ.
ment of women in the theater. their
occupations, etc., to all of which the
witness answered in straightforward
manner, claiming that the house had
been conducted as well as any variety
theatre He was also questioned as to
his own employment before he opened
the Monte Carlo. He denied that
gambling had been conducted in the
! house during his management.
1t was brought out in the redirect
examination that Stevens had had a
conversation with Pelz in April about
advertising, and he had told Stevens
that he had nothing to do with the ad-
verlising of the Monopole cigar store,
which he owned. The lad" had been
ordered out of the Gold Digger.
Rivers on nOraIs.
Harry b. Watson, better known as
Harry Rivers. was the next witness
called, and he testified that he had
been employed at the Monte Carlo the
tire during the latter weeks of last sea-
son, as property man. Considerable
time was consumed by the defense in
gaining from Mr.. Rivers statement
concerning the general morals of the
house and the character of his duties
while employed there. He finally
| stated that he was not competent
Judge of the moral cleanliness of his
duties, and that the vaudeville per-
formances produced at the Monte Carlo
were such as are generally produced in
theatres connected with saloons.
The Defense.
After the noon recess Harry Rivers
was recalled by the defense and ques-
toned further as to the character of
those who had been employed in the
Monte Carlo, but about the only thing
gained from his testimony was the
statement that he was hardly able, by
reason of sleepless night, to collect
his faculties.
Maurice Pelz was again recalled and
questioned relative to there having
been prize fights conducted in the
Monte Carlo under his management.
Witness denied this. whereupon the
defense rested its case, and the calling
of witnesses for the prosecution COM
menced.
Gus Sieffert, Felix Brown, DR.. Edgar
George and j. j. Cole all testified to
having known the complaining witness
during periods extending as far back
as 1888, and none Of them ever knew
him to bear anything but good repu-
tatiOn in the various communities
where they had known him.
Archie League, Comedian.
Archie League, for some time come
dian and stage manager of the Monte
Carlo theatre under Pelz's manage
ment, told what the conditions of his
connection with the house had been,
and explained that his Instructions
from Pelz had been to produce nothing
of a vulgar or obscene character upon
the stage, but that PelZ had never at
tended rehearsaS.
Under cross examination the witness
stated that he had seldom used strenu-
Gus language from the stage and had
lever produced an obscene perform
ance.
The Prosecution Concludes.
The testimony of Noble Wallingford,
eX-chief of police, closed the case for
the prosecution. Mr. Walingford said
that during the time Mr.. Pelz had con-
Quoted the Monte Carlo he had repeat
eddy requested him, as an officer, to
keep characters of bad repute, such as
pickpockets and thieves, away from the
place, and that he had complied by
doing so. He had ordered several such
characters, known to him, to keep
away from the place and had seen that
they obeyed the order.
Brief Argument.
Attorney Bell stated that his argu-
,nent would be very brief, as the most
that he wanted to do was TO show that
the defense had not proven the charges
contained in the libelOus article, neither
had they produced any evidence going
to show justification of the publication
of the matter referred to. He cited
number of authorities and established
precedents in parallel cases, and sub
mitted his case.
Attorney Cochran, for the defense,
based his argument upon the claim
that the libelOus matter was justified
by the testimony concerning the repu-
tation of the Monte Carlo under the
Pelz management, but admitted frank
ly that the last assertion in the article,
wherein PelZ had been charged with
having been run aut of other communi-
ties, was in no way sustained.
Decision of Guilty.
Judge Reed summed up the case
briefly, saying that there was no doubt
in his mind as to the libelous nature of
the article. He was not inclined to be-
lieve that it's publication was shown to
have been justified, because there were
other methods open to the defendant to
prevent the issuance of a license for
the opening of the Monte Carlo than
by the publication of the statements
contained in this article. In view of
that fact, and the further derogatory
statements, which had not been proven
to be true by the testimony, he would
find the defendant guilty, reserving
his sentence till today in order to look
up matter bearing upon the case.
This morning, at the close Of the
Warren trial, Judge Reed stated that
he would postpone the passing of sem
tence till p. IN. tomorrow, in order to
give Acting District Attorney Grigsby,
who il husv in the district cOnrt an on