The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-02-14
Hearing Of the Case of
Lumsden Versus
Broughton.

in a newspaper of proposed measures
With respect to an amendment of the
city charter which any citizen had
right 10 publish.
After hearing extended arguments
from Mossrs. r. Nj. Argo, for the de-
Tense, Perrin Busbcc for the prosccu-
tor. w. y. Jones for the defense and
w. r. Jones, for the prosecutors, JUS
tice Badger at length decided that he
would over-rule the motion to dismiss
and proceed with the taking Of evil
dence in the case.
At the conclusion; of the argument
the court had been in session from
half past twelve until q quarter past
three o'clock and further hearing was
postponed until noon today, two wit
nesses being examined only for the
prosecution, these being Messrs. w. T.
Whitaker and w. j. Andrews, Esq.
who testified as to having received no.
tees Of garnishment aaginst their en-
ployecs from City Tax Collector LumS-
DEL.
Origin OF The Case.
The origin of the acse against Mr..
RroughtOn was set forth at length on
last Saturday morning, the defendant
having been arrested on Friday on a
warrant sworn out before Justice of
the Peace. w. j. Saunders.
Of the board of aldermen has for some
time had under consideration num-
Der of proposed changes to the city
charter to be later drafted into Il bill
and presented to the Legislature and
after the report of that committee Mir,
Broughton on the Sth inst, published
a communication in the Evening
Times in which he discussed some Of
the charter revisions suggested and.
tn, ~ h iDl
vided that the tax collector should
be named by the board of aldermen
and paid a fixed salary instead OF be-
ing elected by the people and receiy-
ing commissions for his services as
is the present rule, said the follow
ing which is the basis of the libel al
legged:
'"rhe first seems to be the election
OF tax collector by the aldermen, in
stead of by the people. Now ii YOU
will look carefully at the collectors
tax book you will find one good rea-
son for this. You will see that there
are hundreds of voters in the city of
Raleigh who pay no poll tax. Why?
One reason why is. that TO make them
pay would require very unpleasant,
and to the delinqucntS very unpopu-
lar proceedings. The tax collector
would have to resort to 'garnishee' and
thus incur the displeasurc off the
voter VINO always votes. especially
in the primary, whether he pays taxes
or not. The collector does not do
that unpopular thing; he saves the
voter to himself ana loses the city
enough none 10 pay his salary
which, by the way. last year amount
ed to more than two thousand dollars.
The collector ought to have no discre-
ton whatever; he should be under no
obligation to any voter constituents
And he should be paid salary. Who
knows what the collector now receives
as compensation for scrvices?'
In the argument on the motion TO
dismiss yesterday. the defense under
took through Col. Argo to say that,
taking the whole article as a basis,
there was no reference intended in the
paragraph above quoted to Mr.. LumS-
den. personally; but that Mr.. Brough-
ton was merely discussing changes in
the Charte Of the city affecting him
as citizen and was referring to Tax
collector as class, or rather as an
office. and that there WAS nothing in
the published statement which Was
either libellouS or which could be
reasonably construed as being pointed
specifically at Mr.. Lumsden.
Mr.. RJSbee. speaking for the de-
fcnSe, comhattcd the proposition that
there was doubt as to the intent of the
paragra PHI to reflect upon the present
tax collector and claimed that the
words in reference to the loss to
the city last year being equal to the
salary of the collector fixed the intent
without doubt
The argument was widcflung in ITS
course, the speakers taking great lati-
tude and was in portions highly tech
meal. Some interest arose by reason
of Q heated passage at arms between
Col Argo and Mr.. Busbec during Col
Argos closing remarks, Mr.. BuShce
several times interrupting Col. .Argo
ana both lawyers talking at one and
the same time to the confusion of
the court and the delight of the large
crowd which was i'm attendance.
After outlining the grounds of his
motion to dismiss as sttacd above. Col.
Argo went on to say that the paper
in question was merely q discussion
Of proposed change, in the charter
of the city which was at the time in
the hands of committee of the beard
OF aldermen to examine into and Sug-
gest amendments. Ii was matter in
which every citizen had an interest
ana III which by reason of his bust
ness affairs Mr.. Broughton was par
tictiariy interested. The paper in its
discussion of the proposed changes he
characterized as fair, conservative ana
and there could not have been a more
talr and temperate paper published
under the circumstances. The por-
ton OF the paper having reference to
the tax collector, said Col. Argo, con-
tanned no reflection on any person
out merely had reference to the Of
nee and the class of encumbentS. The
qualifications, said he was not entirely
voluntary but was in some sense a
int IN, 81,
by reason of having property and the
charge of property Of others. but the
communication WIGS written in answer
TO 4 general invitation OF the Times
newspaper for discussion Of the pro-
posed changes in its columns.
Col. Argo then read the entire ar
tlc'e which was made the basis of
the warrant. stopping as he went
through 1T TO argue each paragraph
ana contending earnestly that there
was no reasonable ground for aSSum-
| ing that Mr. Brouo;,ton had meant Ia