The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-06-02
Resist Removable Wash
| ingtorl.
TESTIMONY OF A REPORTER
Libel Suit Is Argued in Indian
apolis.


indianapolis. Ind, June 1.-Delavan
1 Smith and Charles r. williams, own
| ers OF The Indianapolis News, were
before Judge Anderson of the United
| States Court OF this district. sitting
here today. resisting removal to the
District of Columbia for trial on in-
/ dictments charging them with having
committed criminal libel in publishing
| articles intfmating that there was an
| enormous graft in the purchase by the
United states Of the Panama canal
| zone.
Messrs. Smith and Williams were In
dicted by the grand jury of the Dis
trict OF Columbia Jointly with the pros
prietors OF The New York World
stuart McNamara. assistant United
States attorney for the District Of
Columbia. and Charles w. Miller dis
trIct attorney. represent the govern
/ ment In the case and Ferdinand VIM
| ter. of this city, is the attorney for
the defendants. The latter maintained
today. and sought to prove his points
by the evidence presented. that the
newspaper publishers were not guilty
of the malice necessary to complete
| criminal libel and that they had not
committed an offense for which they
could be removed from one State 20
another for trial and that the lndict-
ment charging them with criminal IL
bel was baseless.
The government resisted the intro
| duction of evidence In the hearing.
/ maintaining that on the face OF the
| Indictment and the information. the
defedants should be transferred to the
4 District OF Columbia for trial.
Judge Anderson ruled against tho
government. He called attention TO the
necessity of proving express, not Inn
piled malice, In a prosecution for
criminal libel. The defense then
placed upon the stand Ernest /. Lewis.
a STAFF correspondent of The News.
who denied that he had had any in-
structions from his employers as to
handling the Panama canal matter fn
his dispatches from the political head
quarters at Chicago during the last
campaign.
Il Judge Anderson salA impiiad malice
J sunieient to Justify Judgment for
damages against the publisher. But III
. criminal action different degree 81
malice was required. Il must Be ex-
press malics.
"of course. there is back 81 this
their intent" said Judge Anderson.
The owner of q newspaper might very
well be held civilly for anything APP
peartng In his pages, because the m@n
who put 1t there are his agents; but
when It comes to a question Of erifn-
inal liability for publication of an arti-
Suppose" continued the court. the
proprietor Of New York paper should
be of for six months cruising In hts
i yacht. During his absence vicious
article appeared In his paper. should
he be held criminally. 1t does not oc-
cur to me that he could be held
criminally liable.
Il am speaking about the ultimate
fact. II the owner 10 not present ne
actually knew nothing about the pub
Iication and could not possibly be held
guilty of the crime"
Mr.. Mcnamara characterized as cabs
surd" the charge OF corruption In this
sale of the Panama canal.
/ Information Asked For.
The court asked Mr.. Winter. counsel
for the defense. for information as TO
the Senate Investigation. Mr.. Winter
said that William Nelson Cromwell had
all along made 1t appear that he was
only the attorney for the French conn
pany and that there were no go-be-
tweens in the transfer to the American
government. though It was charged
that the stock of the French company
had been bought by Americans for
only si2.o00,000. Mr.. Winter said he
thought II might have been cromwelfs
duty not to reveal the identity OF his
clients to the Senate. But what In
ference has the public right to
drawn" commented Judge Anderson.
"The public had the right" said Mr.
Winter. ito discuss and II possible to
ventllate the matter and especially
during q national campaign upon
which depended In large part the char
acter Of the membership OF Congress-"
Questioning Charles r.. williams
editor In chief of The News, Mr.. Me-
Namara drew out that Mr.. Williams
had not written the editorials c0m~
planned of. He had. however. approved
them. Mr.. Williams said the publica-
ton OF the editorials he thought was
in the interest OF public morality and
integrity.
Louis Rowland who wrote the eds
torials and handed them to his chief.
Mr.. Williams. told the court that he
wrote them because he thought the
subject was one of the biggest things
In the campaign" and he would not
have discharged his duty II he had
not discussed II. He made no personal
investigation into the records and he
did not know personally that c. p.
Taft was interested in the Panama
transfer.
so It seems" put In Mr.. McNamara.
bit sarcastically, you thought only
It was the biggest thing current at
the time"
yes" retorted Mr.. Rowland. land
think SO yet l was suspicious and 1
am yet Suspicious. think had very
What did you mean when you wrote
that The New York World might now
be short on evidence bat 1t could be
long on presentationr'
II meant that possibly Just now
there was not sufficient proof to sat~
isfy cross examining lawyers" Mr.
/ Rowland came back
II Mr.. Winter said that many things
were true that could not be proved.
Early in the afternoon Delavan
Smith was on the witness stand and
said he had no personal knowledge Of
the editorials before they were pub
hshed. Unless the government decides
to introduce further evidence tomox-
row morning, argument Will begin
then and the matter will be In Judge
Anderson's hands by evening.
AIru. Francis suicides.