The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-08-25
He's Told His Ideas are
Distinctly Roosian.
DUTY OF THE PRESS
Cool, Calm, Powerful Arguments by
Judge Osborn and Mr.. Busbee.
The Now Famous Case Will
Probably Reach the Jury at
or Before Noon Today.
Especial to News and Observer.)


Greensboro, n. c., Aug. 24.-When
court opened this morning counsel for
plaintiff in the case of Osborn against
Leach and the News and Observer
asked to be allowed to examine Os-
born as to whether his wife suffered
or not on account of the publication.
The Judge had formerly ruled this
testimony was incompetent, but it was
insisted that bsborn's wife's suffer-
ing added to his mental anguish and
this light judgment permitted the
question. Col. Osborn took the stand
ter was to Mrs. Osborn and the fam
lily and retired without a question
from the counsef for the defense.
The issue placed before the jury
was the simple one What damage is
the plaintiff entitled to-"
Argument began at 10 o'clock. Col.
James T. Morehead for the plaintiff
made a fine speech of an hour and 30
minutes. He was caustic in his criti-
cisms of the conduct of Leach and
Daniels referring often to the
expressed good Will of Dan
iels and Leach to Osborn
and their ISLANDERS as an illustration Of
a mans being stabbed by his friends.
He said that the fact of Osborn's S be-
ing thus held up to people in every
nook and corner of North Carolina
where the News and Observer circu-
lated as a penitentiary CRATER and a
horse thief was enough to kill an hon
est man of his tender sensibiiities. His
being stabbed by his friends was the
worst part of it. Morehead con-
tended that the reckless publication
of news which was not true was mai
ice in law though directed against a
personal friend. just as the reckless
discharge of fire arms. make one liable
for malicious wounding or killing.
Rather Privileged Himself?
1t was when discussing the law re-
garding the publication Of news that
Col. Morehead went his full length
and while not forgetting Leach ana
the News and Observer, paid his with
ering respects to the North Carolina
legislature.
He spoke of having made privil-
eyed class of the newspapers, saying
il was an Infamous outrage, neglect
ing to say that many people think
LAWYERS themselves have unusual priv
Ieges when presenting evidence In
their opponents before juries.
His comments on the News ana
Observer the London bill in the leg
isIature and that by some means
some newspaper men had got a plii
through the legislature which they
thought would circumvent the consu-
tutional right of protection to man $
reputation and character, and passed
a law known as the London Bill Wnlcn
they thought muZzled the courts ana
gave them the liberty to lie all they
pleased They thought it was all rlght
for other people to have to perform
their contracts, but not so with them.
The Supreme Court showed where
they slipped up. The News and Obser-
yer tried to set up license TO publlSn
s|anderous matter under this bill IN
tais very case They thought they had
created privileged class IN free
America that it was all right to MAKE
Leach a private citizen, pay smart
money but all wrong for newspaper.
Was there ever such a bald-faced
iniouity attempted to be placed upon
a people as is done by this law glVlhS
newspapers the right to lie at viii ana
never be called to account?
Under this law the private citizen
could have been indicted and sent to
the roads while the newspaper can
whine. You can't do anything with
me but fine me a penny and cost NO
man with proper tUnsluerdtioh 1oI
the people would have knowingly Vot-
ed for any such a law They must
all have been asleep when this law
was pushed or rolled through.
And the worst thing is that this IN
famous law was passed the very hrst
legislature after the publication of
this libel on Osborn.
Ex-Judge F. l. Osborn next spoke in
behalf of his client. NJ. T. Leach, and
when he concluded. court took a re-
cess for dinner C. NJ. Busbee to make
argument for the News and Observer
when court re-convened.
Judge Osborn Replies.
Judge Osborn's argument was a
powerful one, being spoken of by all
as one of the most maSterful ones
ever heard here in long time. He
said in part that if the truth of a pub
ication could be shown in investiga-
ton of actual damages he had proved
that Osborn had received more money
as director of the penitentiary than
the law permitted. The law is that
no director of the penitentiary could
legally accept more than $4.00 per
dav. whereas the testimony showed
that Osborn while director received
5000 for ten days work while buying
mules, or nearly $50 day, whereas
the law forbids such payment. There
fore Judge Osborn argued that such
testimony could be used to mitigate
actual damages. as we'll as exem-
pIarv damage. The defendants can
not be held liable for any injury to
feelings if the truth of the publication
complained of is established. To that