The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1907-10-23
VERDICT
THIS EVENING
ReQn0|ds- Libel Suit
in Hands Of jury

In the libel suit of Alln H. Rynolds
against P c. Holland, which is being
heard in the superior court, the hear
ing of testimony was completed at
noon and counsel is arguing the case
to the jury. AS each side has been al
lotted an hour and a half to present
their respective views, and as the
courts instructions will consume
some time, the jury will not have the
case until after press time ard ver
dict will probably not be returned un-
til later this evening.
At the convening of court this morn
ing testimony offered by the defend
ant of specific acts OF plaintiff, tend
ing to show the truth of the charges
made in the alleged libelous publica-
tions, was excluded and the forenoon
was taken up by heated arguments by
the counsel on legal questions and by
the hearing of testimony in regard to
the charges made by newspapers for
the publication Of legal notices.
Owing to the rulings of the court
based on the decision of the supreme
court in the hearing of this case on
appeal. all evidence regarding the pay
ing of the attorney fee referred to in
the published articles on which the
action is based has been ruled out, and
all the evidence before the jury is the
articles published by the defendant
when he was manager of the States
man in October, 1905; the testimony of
the plaintiff regarding his injured
the charges made for the publication
of a legal notice for plaintiff, which
charges he refused to pay claiming
them to have been exorbitant.
Defendant Shut Out,
The offer made by the defendant to
prove that the attorney fee charged by
plaintiff for his services in the mortg-
age foreclosure of the Farmers Saw
ings bank against The Statesman COM
pany was beyond reason, was denied
as was also the offer to prove specific
actions in an effort to establish the
truthfuness of the assertions made in
he published articles commenting on
the business and other methods of the
plaintiff.
About all the evidence which the
court allowed to be introduced was in
regard to the charges to be made for
the publication Of notice presented
for publication to the Statesman under
the management of Mr.. Holland and
from the testimony on the witness
stand it was apparent that some one
had lied or was badly mistaken Some
of the witnesses were of the impress
sion that some lies had been told.
The records of the Statesman office
showed that the notice had been Or
dered published six times and such
was the testimony of the defendant,
while plaintiff said that the statement
that the notice was ordered published
more than once was absolutely false.
He said he had not noticed whether
on the day ordered but went to the
Statesman office and secured his proof
as he could remember He said l. was
his impression that proof of publication
was made on the day of the fifth pub
lication although the notice had been
ordered published but once. The affi-
davit of publication was sent to the Of
flee of the secretary of state where it is
now on file. Plaintiff testified that he
contracted 10 nave Cn6 nOl1ce puDllSn6d
for five dollars and later rendered 10
dollars to Mr.. Holland and also paid
that amount into court for the notice,
while defendant testified there was no
such agreement and that the bill pre-
sented by him to the plaintiff of $2S.5O
was below the usual charge for such
prin.i ing.
Attorneys Testify.
Attorneys John L. Sharpstein Oscar
Cain ]. W. Brooks and John H. Pedigo
were called to testify as to the charges
usually made them for publishing le-
gal notices. They had all had notices
published in the weekly papers for
which they paid from five to 10 dol
lars. None of them knew anything
about the rates of the daily except
Oscar Cain, who said he had paid five