Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-10-15
ROOSEVELT'S LIBEL
SUIT DISMISSED
Judge Anderson Refuses to Allow
Removal of Delavan Smith and
Charles r. Williams in Panama
Canal Proceedings.

INDIANAPOLIS. Oct. 12-The proceed
ings brought by the government against
Delavan Smith and Charles r. Williams
propr! etors OF the Indianapolis News, VINO
were resisting removal to the District OF
Columbia for trial under grand jury IN
dictment charging them with having COM
mitted criminal libel in publishing arti-
cles alleging that there was a corrupt
profit Of SIS. 900 600 in the sale of the Pan
anna canal to the United States were dis
missed yesterday by Judge \. B. Ander-
son, of the federal court.
THAT man has read the history OF our
institutions to little purpose, said Judge
Anderson, In concluding his decision
who does not view with apprehension
the success OF such a proceeding as this
to the end that citizens could be dragged
from their homes to the District Of Co
lumbia, the seat Of government. for trial
under the circumstances OF this case. Inc
defendants are discharged"
At the close today Of argument IN
the hearing of Messrs. Smith and VIII
liams, Judge Anderson said that he was
too busy with other matters to write
long opinion in the case, although 1t
clearly was one of great public inter
est and Importance, and involved sew
eral complex questions of procedure In
the United States courts. He would
proceed, he said, to sum up at once his
view of the evidence and the argument
SUMMARY OF OPINION.
'I am of the opinion" said Judge
Anderson, that the fact that Ger
tain persons were called thieves and
'swindlers' does not constitute libel
per Sc. A newspaper has certain
duty to perform. AS a former presi-
dent has said, 1T is the duty Of a
newspaper to print the truth about it.
It is the duty of a newspaper to draw
differences for the people
Now, there were many peculiar
circumstances about the whole Pana-
ma canal business. I don't wish to
be understood as rejecting upon any.
body in or out of Office, except such
person or persons as I may name. The
revolution ia Panama, the circumstances
concerning it, were unusual and peculiar.
THE people were interested in the con-
struction OF the canal. 1t was a matter
of great public concern; large portion
of the people favored the Nicaragua
route; another portion. those who were
interested in 1t, officially. and personally
just interested-preferred the Panama
route. A committee was appointed to in
vestigate the relative merits Of the two
routes. They investigated and reported
in favor of the Nicaragua
CHANGED TO PANAMA.
Shortly afterwards they changed to
Panama. Up to the time of that
change. as 1 gather from the evidence.
the lowest offer which had been sug-
gested as the one at which the Panama
property-the property of the Panama
Canal company-could be procured, was
something over $1o0. 900. Then rather
suddenly 1t became known that 1t could
be procured for $4o000,000.
"Now there were number of people
who thought there was something wrong
something not just exactly right about
that transaction, and say for myself
that now I feel a natural curiosity to
know what the real truth was.
''The real truth was, thereupon the
committee Of the United States senate
was appointed to investigate these
matters-about the only way II could
be investigated. The committee met.
as stated in these articles, these men
who knew all about itP