Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1910-09-30
GOVERNOR GWEN
CLEAN BILL BY JURY
AZ ANTICIPATED, VERDICT OF
NOT GUILTY Is RETURNED
CARROLL LIBEL CASE.
STATE HANDICAPPED RY FIRST
RULINGS OF JUDGE HOWE
Whole Z Case Finally Hinged on oues-
ton as to Who Was Assressor in
Controversy Between Carroll and
cownie-verdict Of Guilty impossible
Under { Courts Instructions.

Unders Courts Instructions.
Special tosTimes- Republican.
Des Motnes, Sept. Ex-Governor B.
r. Carroll was declared by jury not
guilty Of criminal libel of John Cownie.
The deliberations of the jury were
brief and the verdict reached was an
ticipated by everyone who has closely
followed the, case.
The jury went to it's room at 3
o'clock .and a verdict was returned
shortly before 9.
It is stated sthat on the first ballot
the jury was divided eleven for ac-
uuittal and one for conviction. This
division remained for six ballots, 1t Is
stated, when the one man who had
heen holding out for conviction Joined
with the others.
John Cownie refused to comment on
the verdict when asked for a statement
last night, excepet to say that the verd-
let was expected.
Before the trial was half finished 1t
was thought by persons following 1t
closely that the governor would be
acuuitted Friends of the governor
were especially confident after it be-
came generally known that the instruc-
tions of the court as to the law In the
case, were favorable to the governor.
Attorneys for the state expected In
structions which would be adverse to
them but. made no complaint to the
court, being satisfied in their own
49, Sc, iv,r-% ,,fi y.c>
the law.
A Clean Bill.
Hence when the jury reported
clean bill for the governor after short
deliberation there was no surprise,
even among counsel for the state.
The verdict is not taken as a con-
demnation of John Cownie, nor proof
of the charges made against him that
he was guilty Of improper conduct with
girls at the state reform school at
Mitchellville, which charges were used
by the governor as basis for the re-
moval Of Cownie from the state control
board.
At no time during the trial did Gov
ernor Carroll or his attorneys contend
that the charges made by the girls
were true and this action on the part
Of the defense made it impossible for
specific denial Of three affidavits altho
he denied, in his own examination. all
such charges. He said:
81 have at no time been guilty OF an
Immoral act or word with any inmate
of the state industrial school for girls
at Mitche,lville."
Court Handicaps State.
Later in the trial the state put Cow
ME on the stand for the express pur-
pose of entering his denial to the
charges, but was foiled in this by OBJ
jections by the defense.
In arguments to the jury attorneys
for Governor Carroll put stress on the
fact that the verdict in this case does
not affect Cownfe nor prove or dis
prove the charges made by the girls.
Every effort was made by the gov
ernor's attorneys to remove from the
minds Of the jurors any idea that in
deciding this case they were going on
record either for or against John Cow
ME.
The state in trying to prove its case
against the governor was confined by
the instructions Of the court to proof
of the claim that the governor acted
with malice in publishing the state
ments he did against Cownie, and that
the governor by these statements ex-
ceeded his legal right of self defense
and retort to charges made against
him.
The charges that Cownie had sold
cattle from the state asylum at Glen
wood in violation of the federal quar-
antine laws, and that he also purchased
goods for state institutions without Sc
curing estimates as required by law,
were in evidence during the trial. but
-lz.lzk
days.
Mr.. cownie Assressor.
The whole case, as it went to the
Jury, hinged upon one question-who
was the aggressor in the controversy,
Cownie or Carroll? Attorney Read for
the state, in his closing argument to
the Jury. asserted this was the pivot
upon which the case turned.
The state to prove that Governor
Carroll was the aggressor had to rely
upon the claim that the governor in
calling in editors and others and tell
ing them Of the charges against Cow
ME, acted with malice and became the
aggressor, forcing Cownie to make the
statements he did in order to set him
self right before the people of the
state. In this, however. the state was
handicapped by the failure to show
that the general public knew anything of
the governors disclosure to them Of
the charges against Cownie, there be-
Ing no evidence that any of the men
diclosed what the governor had told
them.
To combat this and prove that John
Cownie was the aggressor, the defense
claimed before the jury that John
Cownie wrote the first letter that ap-
peared in the public press, and in that
letter all the charges made against him
by the governor were disclosed.
Court Eavors Carroll.
Judge James A. Howe gave unusu-
ally long instructions to the Jury as to
what = the law in the case Of criminal