The news & observer., 1905-06-14


the Charlotte observer and the Morn
ing Post
On cross examination witness stated
that all he knew was that he saw the
speech in the three papers. on re-
direct he stated that he did nor know
of Prof. Flowers coming to Raleigh
to secure the publication i'm the
Morning Post.
Afternoon Session.
At the afternoon session the pIafn
tiff introduced the statement of II. e.
Seaman. printer, of Durham. showing
the printing of ten thousand copies of
the pamphlet containing the report of
the investigation before the board of
trustees of Trinity College The pub
lication was made at the order of
Prof. r. c. Flowers to whom 5000
copies were delivered and paid for by
Trinity College.
Mr.. w p Whitaker. business man.
ager of the Morning Post. stated that
in September. 1898. he held the same
position he now holds He identified
the files of the paper of September
s. 1898. and was asked whether the
speech of DR.. Kilgo was published in
that issue. The testimony was ad-
mitted over objection. with the under
wards connect the defendant with the
publication Witness also identified a
supplement- printed by the Post dated
September 18th and headed The Pro-
gressive Farmer"
Sent Out as Supplements.
Asked as to other papers for which
supplements were printed. the witness
stated that he could not remember
from personal recollection
Miss Broughton, assistant librarian.
came into court and the defendants
admitted that the three books pro-
duced by her were files of the Progress
sve Farmer, the Concord Times and
the Reidsvile Review, of September,
1898.
Mr.. Whitaker then looked at the
files of the three papers and identified
the speech as the same published in
supplement form by the Post.
He stated that he was summoned to
see Mr.. j. II. Southgate as to printing
certain papers. He could not say how
many papers were printed nor any
means of telling papers to which sup
plement was sent, but he was satisfied
that it was sent to other papers than
those mentioned. He was paid by Dr.
j. G.. Kilgo. He identified two checks
of $3.50 each. dated September 29 and
November L. 1893, and signed by J. c..
Kilgo, treasurer of Trinity College.
Asked as to the circulation at that
time. he stated that he did not remem-
ber nor did he know the circulation
of the other papers to which supple
ments We're sent but varying numbers
of papers were sent. He had no con-
tract with the other papers. Their
names were put at the top of the sup
plement by direction of Mr.. Southgate.
who witness said he had heard was
president of the hoard of trustees.
On cross-eXamination witness was
asked whether Trinity College and J.
c. Kilgo had not been attacked i'm the
papers. and whether the publication
was not I'm reply to such attacks.
Plaintiff objected. and objection was
sustained.
Defense Wins Point.
At this point it developed that the
plaintiff had intended TO offer the
three supplements in evidence and the
controversy again arose as TO whether
only that part relating to Mr.. Gattis
or the whole publication should be
submitted.
Judge Graham proposed to read the
portion of the speech relating to Mr..
Gattis, but Gov. Agcock argued at
some length. quoting authorities tend
ing to show that in the Introduction
of any document except Il pleading.
the entire printing or writing must
be put i'm evidence.
Col. Argo argued that in the case
of an author the whole book should
not be put in to give evidence of one
libellous statement. was interrupted by
the judge who said that he saw some
thing about Cold Tar. American Inde-
pendence, etc.
Col. Argo replied by declaring the
entire speech to be composed of diff
ferent and separate allusionS. He said
that Gov. Aycock's case was that of n
running account-a different PROPOSE
ton
Governor Aycock replied by show
ing the distinctive character of the
articles named-one being so much
calico another-the sentence relied on
being that you charged too much for
your brandy-$3 is a high price,
"You seem to be interested in the
brandy" said Col. Argo.
~ am" replied Gov. Aycock cts
old; evidently it hadn't been in your
neighborhood."
Judge Moore finally ruled sustaining
the objection of the defendants, and
the plaintiff excepted.
Entire Speech Goes In.
The plaintiffs then introduced the
entire speech. and the defendants
counsel smiled and waved congratula-
tions The evidence was introduced by
the plaintiff, not waiving his exception.
Judge Graham was on the point Of
reading to Mr.. Whitaker for compari-
son with the complaint portions of
the speeches. when it was admitted by
the defense that the files of the Post
and the supplements contained pubii-
cations identical with portions of the
complaint
Paid for by DR.. KiIeO.
There was further controversy about