The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-02-09
VERDICT AND $500
FOR SAUNDERS
Awarded Against Williams
Printing Co. and Editor of
the Idea.
CASE TO BE CARRIED
TO SUPREME COURT
Saunders is Severely Arraigned by
Meredith and Yoder is
Sharply Scored by
Scott.

--- II the Supreme Court ~ef-AppeaIs
~ustains the verdict rendered by the
Law and Euuity Conrt Jury thar ,rfuu
the suit of Clyde W. Saunders against
the Williams Printing Company and
Adon A. Yoder. editor OF The Idea,
for $4,000 damages, on account of
alleged libel and defamation of char
acter, the Williams Printing Company
will have to pay the PLAINTIFF s1.sou,
Mr. foder being without funds or
property.
The verdict came late Tuesday eve
ming. The argument of the lawyers
on both sides was forceful and fiery.
Denounced by Scott.
Robert T.. Scott, of counsel for
Saunders. In his closing address to
the jury. bitterly denounced the au-
thor of the Objectionable publications.
He characterized Mr.. Yoder as =.
sneaking hypocrite from Lynchburg,
who came to Richmond at the insti-
Cation of Marshall Atkinson. and with
his financial assistance. former pro-
prietor of the Park Hotel. whose IL
quor license was revoked. Mr.. Scott
charged that Yoder came to Ricn-
rnpnd for the specific purpose of nsah-
Ing an attack on those officials who
were instrumental in deprivtng the
hotel man OF his bar license.
Charles v. Meredith. counsel for
the defense, admitted In his address
10 the jury that under the instrue-
ffons of the court the jury must ftnd
for the plaintiff He directed his ef
forts toward palliating the libel and
pleading with the jury for a small
award of damages.
The jury was out Just an hour.
When the verdict was handed to the
clerk OF the court BY Foreman r.. c.
Wherry IL WAS ! O'clock.
Mr.. Meredith moved 10 set aside
the verdict on the ground that II WAS
contrary to the Law and evidence In
the case Judge ingram overruied
the motion
The court allowed the defense nine
ty days TO file bills OF exception and
prepare the record for an appeal
Bond in the sum Of $2.90e was re-
anired. and 1t must be given within
fifteen days ii the defense decides to
carry tho case TO the appellate court
Meredith scores Sanders.
Mrx Meredith scored Clyde w.
Saunders roundly In his appeal TO
the jury I'm behalf Of his clients. Dis
as a power In the politics of Rich
eussing the reputation OF Saunders
mond. he said:
sfFfSe years ago a minority of three
members Of the grand jury made sur
prisfng charges against him as a man
VIII had scheme until he had we'll
niz accomplished his nefarious
YN1se Is so injured now by this
puEyr5ion. said MIR. Meredith. why
wash Ae tnjured by Royals speeches
In the Cdpitol square, He says the
-<sxf
fight was dropped. II that was his
reputation five years ago. where Is
the reputation that was so much in
5ured by this publication. We be-
iieve that this matter critic.xing
Saunders was privileged. His Honor
has ruled otherwise. and so far as
this court liz concerned we can but
submit
NON. as TO the character or Mr.
yoder. When l ind one man un-
donbtedly the partner of the policy
king'--and that Is undoubtedly the
meanest kind of gambling in the
world--and the other man associating
with ministers. who sympathize with
his efforts for clean city, then
prefer the latter man.
Il am not undertaking to say that
everything MIR. Yoder says Is right.
No man stands so high as to be above
criticism. Now. i ask you jurymen.
wasn't this suit brought for the pur-
pose OF breaking up the publication?
We believe that this matter criticizing
Saunders was privileged"
From The Idea he read an attack
on Frank Ferrandini. member of the
roe ward. described by Yoder as be-
ifsg the proprietor OF II saloon for ne
groes, and recalled that Saunders had
supported the appointment of Ferran-
tini as superintendent OF elections
In Ills ward.
"A man Is to be judged by his assoc
eiates.. he said. How does IT. hap
pen that Saunders Is an associate OF
Ferrandini and Anthony Griffith. the
pQuEl King of Rfchmossd?"
N Explains His Connection.
VII. Meredith took occasion to ex-
pls.n his own connection with the
u fra @aiise OF the Richmond Traction
I Com aay. He said there had been
specif'c contract with Mr Bemiss
BY which all money spent must be
accounted for. In the Bell Tele.
phone fight. he said. there was no
H such contract Saunders was en-
ployed by Hunt Chipley to see GER
tain ccunciimen In Clay ward. They
we're Aldermen Hartman, Whtttet and
oeay and Councfirnen Blanks, Glib
sons CottrelI, Miner and winston.
Two Of these he did not see. 90 he
rot $1,000 for seeing six men about
matter OF which he knew moth
1ng. Can you put that on the same
basis as where there was written
& contract
II don impute that any at the
councilmen received any of tho
money" He closed with an appeal
4 10 the Jury for minimum damages
1 against his clients.
When the ury retired to deliberate
there was- only the question Of the
amount of damages to be awarded.
Some were for nominal damage<.
eoEne Tor y much larger sum than
\ onAailAr amount