The Detroit times., 1911-01-16
IYs STORY was
libel ON OSBORN
|o1ge Flanagan Refuses To Quash
Charge Against Editor Baldwin
and Case Goes To Trial.

. II MAHQUETTE, MICH. Jan. u
a. opinion handed down at Escanaba,
nudge r.. c. Flanagan OF this judicial
circuit has ruled against f. l.. Bald
win. editor and publisher of the rs
tanaba Journal In the now famous
criminal libel case in which the news
raperman Is the defendant ana Wnicn
was argued In Marquette Few weeks
nco. Mr.. Baldwin, who Is accused Oh
libeling Gov. Chase s. Osborn, moved
that the charged be quashed' inc
court denies the motion.
The case was removed to the circuit
court ON an appeal by Baldwin's at
forneys. and Judge Flanagan suDse-
ouentIy granted a motion OF the re-
epondent TO withdraw his plea OF not
cuilty for the purpose of submitting
4 motion to quash. This motion was
+ argued at length before Judge Fianni-
ran and the court has had II under
"A isement until this week. The mo-
zion now having been denied, this dis
nonai OF the case means that the case
w1u have to go to trial on its merits
before Judge Flanagan and jury
In a lengthy opinion, Judge Flanni'
yam says. In part:
article. in whole or in any part, stand
, ing alone, Is not libelous, wnlie pisus-
fble and persuasive, Is not convincing.
On the other hand much dimculty 10
encountered in meeting the conten-
ton that, giving to the words or tne
article and OF the complaint a most
liberal construction. some OF the para
graphs are not libelous. But, IL any
Dart of the article In and or itself, or
e aided by the statements or the SO
called inuendo, Is libelous. the COM
pIaint must be upheld. Consequently
q discussion Of the question whetner
the remaining paragraphs are or are
not libelous Is, for the purpose OF TINS
notion. unnecessary and for that rea-
son but one paragraph will be noticed
It this time.
"The first paragraph OF the article
reads as follows: VIII Osborn tell
the people of Michigan how much
money he got, IL any, for betraying
ex-Congressman Stephenson at the
Ironwood congressional convention
some years ago.? Following this we
. ma bracketted in the complaint these
words: Thereby intending and mean
ing TO charge said Chase s. Osborn
with having unlawfully received mon
~ for betraying ex-Congressman
Macpherson at the Republican congress
eional convention held at Ironwood In
the year 1896, at which convention
snid Congressman Stephenson, one
Carl d. Sheldon and said Chase s.
Osborn were candidates for nomina-
tion..
sIn constituting the language COM
plained OF, the rule Is that the words
arc to be taken In their plain and nat
oral meaning. They are to be con-
sfrued according to their common un-
derstanding, and not according to the
pnblisher's secret intention. Applying
fhia rule. the conclusion that libel
Is charged In the first paragraph Is
Inevitable. Indeed II may with assur-
ance be said "a point, however, not
now necessary TO decide and not de-
cidedC that the first paragraph OF the
article without the matter Incorporate
ed by way OF inuendo is in and OF It
pelf libelous. Counsel comedies that
the language OF this paragraph 'natur.
ally conveys the idea that Mr.. Os-
born did betray the late Congressman
6tephenson for a consideration Hav-
ing gone that far 1t Is futile to deny
the paragraph does not also naturally
convey the idea that Mr.. Osborn was
thereby guilty OF the commission of
degrading act.
ANY act which causes one to lower
n character, to lose reputation or
handing is a degrading act. TO be-
tray, according to the common, ordi-
nary understanding OF the word, is to
be disloyal, to act treacherously, and
there would seem to be no escape from
the proposition that to charge Mr.. Os-
{ born with having betrayed the late
Mr.. Stephenson at the Ironwood con-
ureesional convention OF 1896. for a
money consideration or without IL, is
to charge him with the commission of
an act which, IL committed, would de-
grade him In character, reputation and
standing in the estimation OF all good
people"