New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-03-19
W. N. AMORY ON STAND.
NO LIBEL, SAYS VREELAND
Plaintiff Says He ReceiUed $1,000
to Investigate u. S. r. System.

The trial OF the suit OF William N Amory agt.
President Vreeand of tho Metropolitan Street
Railway Company for libel begun before JUS
uce Dayton yesterday in the Supreme Court. Mr.
Amory demands $4,000 damages from Mr. Vree-
land Colonel Franklin Bartlett appeared for the
defendant. Henry NJ. Earle represented Mr.
Amory. De Lancey Nicol also appeared as special
counsel for Mr. Vreeland. Mr.. Amory con-
nected with the Third Avenue Railway Company
for many years.
The complaint alleges that because Of the de-
PENDANTS high and responsible position his state
ments and remarks relating to the said street rail-
way companys business in the city Of New York
are widely repeated. published and circulated and
read throughout the United States generally"
Containing. it recites that about March II. 1903,
Vreeland declared that he (Amory) had been
guilty and was guilty OF misconduct. dishonesty
and infdelity in the performance Of his duties in
his said capacity. and that he had been guilty OF
being a willing instrument Of spectators in an
effort to bear the stock of the Metropolitan Street
Railway Company. and that he had been guilty OF
extortng or attempting TO extort large sums OF
money a condition OF withdrawing bear at
tacks against the said stock. and that he had been
guilty of malicious schemes or nstigating ma
licious INSCRIPTIONS attacks against the Metro
politan the Third Avenue and other companies
The answer put in by counsel for Mr. Vreeland
declares that the alleged libel is not libel. but
the truth.
Mr.. Amory testified yesterday that he received
5000 from J. Coleman Drayton and Herbert Taylor
FOR the work he did expert in the examina-
ton OF the Third Avenue company. which
statement of the examination the alleged libel Is
based He said he had obtained all the financial
papers Of the company which had been filed and
published. and used them for his article OF pub
lefty He said he had not distorted the facts. He
denied that he had attempted to bear the Metro
poltan stock
Were you asked to enter into deal7" counsel
asked
Il was" replied Mr. Amory.
Did you do so?"
Il did not; 1 turned over the facts to District
Attorney Jerome"
Did you ever file charges against the company
asked counsel
Il did" replied the witness.
with whom
The District Attorney"
Were the statements you gave the District At
No: they we're ali true"
Did You make the charges for the purpose OF
Did YOU have any confederatesY'
Not unless the District Attorney could be con-
Mr.. Amory said he hal received 5000 from T. J.
Sl5l0 from Drayton Brothers. both Wall Street
poIiian street HALLWAY system
threw the charges out of his office
No was The answer but 1t Is fact that ne
You are not friendly toward Mr.. Jerome are
yong?
criminals"
so MIR. Jerome protects criminals? And did
Judge Barlow also protect criminals when he threw
your criminal libel charge
Mr. Earle objected, and Mr.. NiCOn said his object
to show 10 the jury what kind of q man Mr.
Amory The court sustained the objection.
Mr.. Amory said he went to James r Keene and
told him that the Metropolitan street Railway COM
pauy had stolen 100000 and that IL was in bad
financial way
Elcoll
Il did" replied Nj. Amory.
What did YOU ask for
you knew that Mr.. Keeue operated on the bear
side Of the market"
The witness said ne did. and admitted that when
he bid .01o for the subway franchise he had a
number OF unSatisfed judgments against him.
Later no admitted that James r Keene had re-
fused 60 have anything 10 do with the iuvestiSa-
ton Of the Metropolitan system.
Adjournment was taken until this morning