The Norfolk weekly news-journal. (Norfolk, Neb.) 1900-19??, 1907-11-22
VERDICT FOR SIX CENTS.
END OF FAMOUS sHEIBLEY.Ash.
TON LIBEL CASE.
DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ALSO
One Of Several Gases Commenced
Several Years Ago Against North
Nebraska Pubishers-Grew Out or
the First Mccarthy Campaign.

The libel case OF Anna w. Sheibley
of Ponca against Charles s. Ashton,
formerly publisher OF the Ponca Jour
nal, was finally disposed OF In Sioux
City on Tuesday, Judge Gaynor in
structing the jury to bring in n YER
dict for the plaintiff and fixing the
amount of damages at cents. The
trial came to an abrupt end after last
ing less than one day
This Is one OF several cases brought
by Miss Sheibley against various
newspapers of the northern part
of the state on account of publications
made in behalf of ex-Congressman Nc.
Carthy during his first campaign for
representative. The News was one of
the papers from which 1t was expect
ed to secure some $4,000. This case
was settled out of court a year ago
last spring-but that is another story.
OF the Ashton case the Sioux City
Journal says:
The termination of the trial came as
surprise. 1t was thought that it
would require at least two days. The
jury was impaneled, the opening argu-
ments made and one witness examined
before the end of the morning session.
When the defense announced that 1t
rested, one of the plaintiffs attorneys
made a motion to direct a verdict in
favor of the plaintiff and assess nomi-
nal damages The court thought 6
cents was sufficient, and the verdict
was drawn up and signed by the fore
man of the jury. The costs were also
taxed to the defendant and as the case
has once been through the supreme
court the costs will be considerable
The defendant is undecided whether
he will appeal. His attorneys were
given sixty days in which to file a bill
of exceptions,
An imposing array Of legal talent
was lined up when the trial opened.
The principal attorney for the plain
tiff was w. V. Allen, of Madison, Neb.,
a former United States senator. Ac-
cross the table from him sat ex-Con-
gresham ]. ]. Mccarthy who was
the principal figure in the alleged SLAM
derous affidavit. He was assisted by
his brother, Will Mccarthy, of Ponca,
Nebraska and d. H. Sullivan, Of Sioux
City. Senator Allen was assisted by
w. e. CAN'T, of Sioux City.
The opening arguments were brief,
Senator Allen speaking for the plain
tiff and ]. ]. Mccarthy for the defend
ant. Mr.. Allen stated that the evid-
ence would show that Miss Sheibley
did not know the contents of the aft
davit made by Mrs. Matilda Drager
that she had no part in securing the
same and that the second affidavit
denying the first was a libel on her
character.
In the opening statement for the de-
Tense Mr.. Mccarthy said that the de-
Tense would endeavor to prove that
Miss Sheibley induced Mrs. Drager to
make the affidavit which concerned
himself He declared also that the let
ter would be introduced to show that
Miss Sheibley was particularly anxious
to defeat Mccarthy.
Ashton First Witness.
The plaintiff sprung surprise by
calling Mr.. Ashton as the first witness.
His examination by the plaintiffs at
torneys was simply to identify the
copies of his paper which contained
alleged libelous affidavit, and state
the circulation the paper had at the
time it was published.
Miss Sheibley testified that she was
notary public at Ponca, Neb.
Most of the Afternoon session was
devoted to reading the testimony of J.
H. Brown at the first trial. 1t brought
out letters that were written by Miss
Sheibley at the time of the memorable
congressional campaign. These letters
urged Mr.. Brown, who was one of the
leaders of the opposition to Mccarthy,
to visit her, as he could get an affidavit
from a certain party that would be of
use to him. In the letter, which was
Miss Sheibley said she had some in
formation which she could not write.
at is a terror" was one of the eX-
pressions used.
Defendant in Own Behalf
Following the reading of the deposi-
ton Mr.. Ashton took the stand. He
said that he had no malice toward the
plaintiff; that the AFFIDAVIT was brought
to him by H. c. Drager husband OF
Mathilda Drager, and that he publish
ed 1t because he thought its contents
were true. H. C. Drager testified that
his wife was sick at home and that he
gave the affidavit to Ashton.
The defense then rested. No evil
dence in rebuttal was introduced and
the motion for direct verdict follow
ed.
Miss Sheibley sued Ashton for $780,
900 damages. At former trial, which
lasted several days, verdict was re-
turned for the defendant. The sup
rene court reversed the case, one of
the principal grounds being that the
court should have let the Jury decide