The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-06-17

not make investigation he is guilty
not only of malice, but of most CEN
surable conduct beside. IF he har-
bored such suspicion on slight Occa~
sion he is guilty" He didn't think that
DR.. Kilgo had spoken on slight oc-
casion. A man who would do so on a
breath of a suspicion without trying to
verify what he had heard, would have
a heart baser and more black than he
credited the defendant with having. He
didn't think Kilgo that sort of a man.
He had been lead aStray by an over
weening, un-Godly ambition. He knew
it was false when he spoke it!
This speech had been uttered by
Kilgo and Duke had actively assisted
in its publication, although all his acts
had been official. Mr.. Duke had mere
~ acted without regard for conse-
quences, and in the interests of his
business.
Powder when it is exploded has no
reference to the end for which it is
ignited.'
He did not think that Mr. Duke had
any personal i'll will to Mr.. Gattis
do you mean that as an admis-
sion?" asked Governor Aycock.
who said anything about an ad-
mission? It's a mission, if you like.
We don't have to show Mr.. Duke 8
personal i'll will. l state that he had
no i'll will. l would be the first to
deny it. l would defend him against
the charge. But / say that when he
helped to send forth these SANDERS,
when he trampled on this old man he
made himself guilty!
Are you satisfied with that ar
line 2"
Colonel Argo has been attending
Burning Bush meetings, interjected
Mr.. Pou.
yes" replied the Colonel. I'm like
Abraham at the bush, and if L found a
ram in it I'd sacrifice him."
1T was Moses at the Bush" claim
ed Mr.. Pou.
1.-THE cavorter is losing his Scripter
again" replied Col. Argo.
But if Mr.. Duke for the purposes
of his corporation recklessly assisted
in the publication in the interests OF
controversy between Judge Clark
on the one side, and the American
Tobacco Company, Duke and kilgo Oh
the other, he is guilty. Mr.. Gattis
might have been trodden on like an
ant, but they were guilty all the same.
AS long as there is a serious con-
troversy on a fact the question is for
the jury to decide. So on a question
of probable cause, where the facts are
admitted. it is a question for the
Judge; where there is question OF
facts it is for the jury. What is pro-
bable cause is for the Judge; whether
there was probable cause, for the jury
to determine.
Governor Aycock's Eloquent Reply.
Governor Aycock said that he should
not be able to say what he felt, nor
state adequately his view of the law.
The case wore on him because his
heart was in it, He had been listen
ing to denunciation of DR.. kilgo until
the whole purpose seemed to be to
villify him. He had heard that he
had left a Shiny trail in South Caro-
lima, that he is vain, that he is inexor-
ably ambitious that he carried malice
in his heart, that he bears personal
ill will against his brother Gattis-and
then we are assured that he would
make an excellent lawyer. If that is
the estimate of a lawyer let the pro-
fession diel And as the denunciation
went on the men of the press were
pushing their pencils fast. Print it!
1t will not injure the man whose life
is set to the aid of his felloWman. Col.
Argo has said that he has hooded"
the people. If so the "hOOdO" came
from service; he has ''guffered' us
if so he "guffered" people by being Il
bigger man than those he "guffered.'
DR.. Kilgo is a sensitive man. When
a man in high station accused him of
u miserable subterfuge, his honor
took notice of the fact He went on
to say that DR.. Kilgo was an ambi-
tious man and rightly SO. He had
pride--a proper pride. They drag in
the Cigarette Trust. If Mr.. Duke gave
Trinity College money. not dollar
went into Dr. Kilgo's home or into, his
salary, because he can today COM
mand a bigger salary anywhere than
he gets from Trinity AS to Judge
Clarks letter saying you have been
misnformed he stated that it after
wards came out that he had said
it. He referred to the investigation.
The Trustees were gentlemen, good
men. They heard the testimony, look
ed Gattis in the eyes on the stand,
heard him refuse to answer. After
wards they heard DR.. Kilgo speak,
partly for evidence, partly in argu-
ment
plaintiffs counsel say that because
DR.. Kilgo spoke and because Mr..
Duke was there-although they admit
that he had no personal i'll will to Mr..
Duke-they are both liable. Then all
the Trustees are guilty. These good
men! Are you going to sue a whole
State for libel? And for doing moth
ing except printing all that happened?
The law safeguarded such actions by
making them privileged.
Governor Aycock read from a case
in which it was held that the proceed
ings of a doctors counsel in which a
members name was erased were privi-
legged; that the grounds on which the
member was removed were proper for
the public to know: and that relevant
comment, no matter whom it hurt,
was also privileged
He read from another case in which
it was held that if every harsh word
be made the subject of an action, men
would be afraid to say anything ex-
Get words of praise and forget the die
tates of their consciences.
Governor Aycock said that even if
the defendants had malice-altnough
they didnt-they would not be guilty
1t was merely a publication of what
happened on privileged occasion.
He illustrated the point thus.
Many hard things had been said about
DR.. KiIgo. The papers would print
them alI--and print them accurately
Yet they would not be liable, because
they printed merely what had hap
pened.
Again, say that one Raleigh paper is