The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1906-04-03
n. {. HOME REPLIES

DisCIaims Reflection on
Mrs. Norris Re-Asserts
Charge VS.. Husband.
The answer ia the ease Of Mrs. {.
=. Norris vs.. the North Carolina Home
Insurance Company, for libel, and III
which she assessed damages at $50
GEO, was filed yesterday afternoon
With the Clerk of the Superior Cou:t
OF Wake County.
The complaint was published yes
terday i'll its material portions.
The contentious of the suit, briefly,
are tha the defendant. iii words set
forth in lis answer to the action
brought by the plaintiff. G. \. Nor
ris and her husband, NJ. r. Norris.
for. the cove of a policy of ~
a house owned by the plaintiff,
charged with malice hat the house
was burned BY an inCendiary Who
was acting as the agent of Mrs. c.. a.
Norris, and that the burning WAS
done in the interest Of the owner of
the house in order that she might re
cover the mount of the policy of III
surance. 1t was also alleged III the
complaint that the charge set forth
in the answer To the action for the
~ecoVery Of the amount of the policy
was made at various other times
and to divers persons.
As has been published at length,
the charges set forth in the answer
eliminated in the arrest of Mr.. NJ. T.
Norris, husband of the plaintiff IN
the damage suit, on, the criminal
charge of having caused the fire
which destroyed the property at issue.
a hearing on this charge was lad
before Il magistrate at which the de-
PENDANT, NJ. T. Norris, introduced no
testimony. On the day when the
magistrate was to have announced his
decision afIidaVits were submitted by
members of the family Of the plain
tiff and by a young woman guest at
his house to the effect that one of
the material witnesses for the State
had stated in their presence hat his
testimony at the preliminary eXami-
nation vas false. The decision Of
the magistrate in the matter of the
criminal charge against NJ. 7. Norris
pose Of q reorganization Of this wit
ness, which has been set for 1870
today
The material portions of the an
sWer filed by the North Carolina
Home Insurance Company in the
complaint DN MIS-. MOTHS IN the dc-
ton for libel are as follows:
Answer Of Defendant.
The allegations of articles six, seven
MED.
Further answering the allegations
of articles 6, Z and s of the complaint,
the defendant says:
That on the 14th day Of March.
1906, it had prepared n fled an
a. = 90 e
the Superior Court of Wake County,
liz an action pending in said court,
entitled &C. y. Norris and NJ. T. Nor
ris, her husband, vs.. the North Caro-
lima Home Insurance Company"
brought for the OF five hun
dred dollars on ccoun of the burn
ing Of the house mentioned i'm the
complaint, in which as a second de-
Tense TO the aid action these words
We're used:
THAT the defendant is in
formed and believes that the said
fire by which the said building
was consumed was the work Of
an incendiary and the circum-
stances attending said burning
were such that the defendant is
informed and believes that the
same was done by an agent in the
interest of the alleged owner.
and in order that she nigh re-
Y the amount of the said
Insurance."
and that the defendant believed. ana
still believes, said words to b true:
and that said defendants defense was
set IN. as expressed III Sai,l words.
BONA ide and to protect defendant
against an unlawful claim: and that
the same is privileged in law:
Firth. That it was not the inten-
ton Of the defendant TO Charge in
said words and il did not. and does
not, charge that the plaintiff author
lied the said burning or was morally
responsible therefor: but shat the
agent referred to in said words. who
Was her husband and general agent
attending to all her business .nd ce-
recially the renting of her real estate.
| including h property mentioned in.
the complaint, collecting rents In
surfing houses AMI paving the nren7-
iuns. was acting rs her general agent
IN the matters aforesaid at he time
the said house was burned and that
the sdid husband. rs tho defendant
is Informed and believes. did uuIaw-
fully. Wilfuily and Of deliberate pur-
pose frc and burn the said house. and
Nnat the plaintiff is barred and oef1p-
ped t" recover from said company the
loss sustained bv said fire.
sixth. That in response 10 article
. Of the complaint the dcfendan saws
that said words mentioned in articlo.
iouf OF this answer were SET forth in
an answer in tho action mentioned
in article I hereof on March II 1905
seventh That the allegations Of
article 10 of the complaint are IN
true.
Signed by r. H. Battle and Arro
ana Shaifer attorneys for the defend-
ant and verified by Alexander Webb.
Nlcc-lfcSldcnt If tho North Carolina
nome Insurance Company.