The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-06-13
Sensation Marks
Gattis VS., kilg0.
CONTINUED from Page FourD

many Methodists there are"
Judge Winston replied that he desir-
ed To show the reasonableness of the
size of the publication.
The witness was allowed to testify,
and over another exception, stated that
the college was under control of the
two North Carolina Conferences; the
students came mostly from North car
olina, but from other States.
There was further objection, Mr..
Watson saying that witness could not
testify as TO the number of Methodlsts
in the State except from his own
knowledge
The judge held that he could make
an estimate. A moment later, how
ever, Mr.. Watson objected ON the
ground that though Judge Winston
was cross examining the witness. he
could not lead the witness in BRING
ing out new matter.
While authorities were sent for
counsel lounged in their chairs and
ioked one another briskly. Mr.. Pou
stating that he would give the plain
tiffs as much time to make good their
prophecies as Elisha accorded the
prophets of Baal.
Several cases were read from the
North Carolina reports and the point
argued by Gudge Graham. The objec-
ton was overruled and the plaintiff
excepted.
Mr. Ballard then gave as his esti-
mate of Methodists 40. 900 for North
Carolina and 10000 in South Carolina;
that there were SO trustees, Z elected
by each conference and II recon-
mended by the alumni of the college.
Judge Winston attempted to identify
the pamphlet by the witness and there
was objection which was oVerruled.
The witness examined the pamphlet
and identified it and it was marked
Exhibit B."
He was then asked to examine the
pamphlet and say whether it was Il
correct account of the investigation.
There was objection on the ground
matter of defense through plaintiffs
witness, but that they should introduce
it themselves.
The Real Fight of the Day.
Col. Argo stated that they relied en-
tirely on the speech. The Supreme
court had stated that all they had to
do was to show the libellous matter,
connect the defendants with it. prove
their damages and quit That's what
we are doing. We haven't said any
thing about the pamphlet. They shant
put in their evidence through our wit
ness. We are not quibbling, said Col.
Afgo, who spoke vehemently. AS he
stopped some one said:
1T sounds like Rojestvensky' adj
dress
More like what Togo said and what
was said at Trafalga,' returned Col
Argo. At Trafalqa Nelson nailed to
the flag staff, Every Englishman must
do his duty" Togo said. THE fate of
the Empire hangs on the fleet" Ro-
jestvensky said IF 1 whip. you'll hear
from me; if the other fellows wins,
you'll hear of it from him.
Judge Winston contended that the
way had been opened by the plaintiff
showing the publication of the pamph-
let for cross examination as to its con-
tests.
Mr. c. B. Watson then outlined the
idea of the defense that the testimony
of witness as to the pamphlet was on
ly for the purpose of showing the con-
nection of the defendants with the
publication of the speech.
Ex-Governor Aycock was in the
midst of an argument on the advisa-
bilty of the evidence and reading from
the record the minutes of the board
of trustees and the executive commit
tee when there was objection by Mr..
Watson, on the ground that the
pamphlet was not in evidence.
Governor Aycock. after a warm ar
Sument, TOOK the DOCKS ana Iedu from
them
That's slight of hand" said Mr..
Watson.
II never did any slight of hand in
my life!" retorted Gov. Aycock, nor
was l ever run over eithern'
Col Argo read from the report of
the Supreme court on former hear
ing of the case in which he claimed it
was stated that there was no obliga-
ton on the plaintiff to put in any evil
dence except the specific article COM
planned Of He charged that the de-
Tense was attempting to avoid putting
in evidence.
After the judge had ruled that the
question was incompetent Mr. I. T.
Hicks made further argument.
Judge Moore held that nothing
could be heard from the witness as to
the contents of the pamphlet until il
cepted
The witness Ballard went on to say
that he was present at the investiga-
ton. Asked as to whether DR.. ekilgo
was present and whether he was un-
der the control of the board of trus-
tees. There was objection, and Judge
Winston stated that he was attempting
to show that there was qualified
privilege. On the former trial the
and the court held that it showed
qualified privilege. Now they don't
show it; we desire to. We desire to
show that there was a qualified PRIV
ilege.
Judge Moore stated that if the wit
ness was permitted to testify it would
open the door to all facts which had
been inhibited by the Supreme court
and announced that he would hold his
decision.
Judge Winston again argued the
matter of methods of proving privilege
and Gov. Aycock stated that on the
question of malice it was competent to
snow what took place at the investiga-
ton as we'll as by testimony of people
present as by the report of the pro-
ceedings.
Mr. Pou stated that the defense OF
privilege depends first on the oc-
casion. Therefore we can prove that
the occasion was privileged and also
can prove that the report was the cor
rect one, and that all the defendants
We're entitled to a statement from the
secretary was a correct one.
Mr. Watson stated that they were
| trying to put in evidence without put
| ting it in.