Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1913-05-29
FRIENDS TELL Of
7. r. SOBR|ETY
Impossible to Re under Influence
of IntOxicants without Their
Knowing 1t.
NEVER SMELLED OF LIQUOR
Ruling of Judge Excludes Ger.
tain Hearsay Testimony by
Persons Not Intimately
Acquainted.
NEVER SMELLED OF LIQUOR

Marquette. Mich May 2S.-Men who
nave been associated with Colonel
Roosevelt IN public and private life.
who met him on the Nile when he re-
turned from his African hunting trip.
a. newspaper men who accompanied
MIN on his various political cam
paigns, testified to-day in Col Theo-
dore Roosevelt's libel suit against
George y. Newett, newspaper owner
of lshpeming, Mich, that the former
president not only was not a drunk
ard but that he was notably and ex-
tremely temperate in the use Of in
toXicants.
1t would have been impossible. the
witnesses said. for Colonel Roosevelt
ever to have been under the in1u
ence OF liquor without the fact be-
coming known to his associates It
would have been equally impossible
they testified, for him to have drunk
liquor with any regularity without
the smell of 1t on his breath being
apparent to thu friends who testified.
Throughout the hearing of the case.
in which the former president is suing
for $4,000 damages because of the
ial charging him with getting drunk.
colonel Roosevelt listened with evil
ueht satisfaction to the testimony of
FORMER members of his cabinet and of
newspaper men. Frequently his face
lit up with a smile as some incident
or his campaigns or hun ing trips was
related from the witness stand.
once Colonel Roosevelt gave vent to
an audible chuckle. That was when
Robert Bacon, former secretary of state
in telling Of his acquaintance with mem
bers of the Roosevelt family said the
colonel was the father of five children.
The colonel has six
IMPORTANT RULING BY COURT
The days proceedings were marked
by an important ruling by Judge Richard
{. Flanagan, which in the introduction
of evidence by the defense will have the
effect of excluding certain kinds OF
hearsay testimony. This ruling came
after prolonged argument. Its effect
was that Colonel Roosevelt's general
reputation is an issue in the case and
testimony bearing upon his reputation
may be introduced, but that rumors ul
reports about his reputation, coming
from persons not qualified by experience
to judge, shall not be admitted In the
future progress of the hearing. it was
ruled by the court, a person who has
Travelled extensively with the former
president who has been associate
with him with any degree of constancy
may testify as to his reputation. But a
man who heard the colonel deliver a
political speech or saw him for only a
few moments in a crowd may no,
testify as to his general reputation, al
though he may tell how the colonel act
ed or appeared at that particular time.
James IT, Pond and William II. Var
Benschoten, Colonel Roosevelts attor,
neys, said the ruling was agreeable tc
their argument Horace Andrews, one oi
Mr.. Newett's counsel, described the
present civil action as "a semi criminal
case" and pleaded for an unrestricted
ruling on the admission of evidence by
the defense.
Almost every phase of Colonel Roose
velt's public life was touched upon by
| to-day's witnesses. All of them spoke
with emphasis when they expressed per
sonal knowledge in denying, as the edi-
torial charges, that the colonel gets
drunk and that not infrequently, and al
his intimate friends know It."
DRANK ONLY FROM COURTESY,
| 1t was asserted that whenever Colone
Roosevelt drank champagne, or wine oi
mint julep, it was out of courtesy to hi.
host at some public function, that ht
often took only mouthful from win,
! IL. ~, aatp, ho IL, >
railroad company not to place in his
special car the supply OF liquors usually
placed in such cars.
| The witnesses were Mr.. Bacon. Tru
man H. Newberry. former secretary o
the navy. John Callan OLaughlin o
| Washington, newspaper correspondent
M. Lucus f. Curtis, a New York news
paper man. and ellison Gardner, news
paper man. who testified the day lefor'
and was recalled.
Repeatedly and in varied phrases tn,
same question was put to each witness
Have you ever known Mr.. Roosevelt t,
| be under the Influence of liquor o
have you ever smelled liquor on Mr.
Roosevelts breath?" and the answer In
variably was negative.
whether the colonel was in the habit o
drinking intoXicants regularly In an!
quantities and the answer again wa
negative.
Mr. OLaughln, who said he knew
Colonel Roosevelt for many years pu
a degree of positiveness to his an
swers by saying:
Il not only never knew of the col
onel's having been under the innu
ence of liquor. but any suggestion
that he ever was, appeared to me. OF
account of my intimate Acquaintance
Il with him, to be absolutely silly"
Mr., O'Laughlin said he had heard
general report circulated among news
pal er men that the colonel was in tn
habit OF getting drunk but that h,
regarded II as wholly unfounded AM
not worthy OF notice.
Mr.. Newbury and Mr.. Bacon wer,
equally positive as to Colonel Roose
Ayslt'a habtta Of sobriety.