New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-06-01


gressive ticket ! opposed his election, hav-
ing been a lifelong Republican and be-
lieving that the success OF that party
would be for the best interests Of the
country. In October. 1912. Mr.. Roosevelt
made a campaign trip through Northern
Michigan. and among other places spoke
at Marquette on the 9Th. / was present
on that occasion and heard him speak. In
the course of his address he made what
| considered a most unjust attack ON our
candidate for Congress. who was one OF
my lifelong friends
This incident, together with the state
ments which had previously come to my
knowledge. confirmed me in the opinion
that Mr.. Roosevelt ought not 10 be elected
President, and | decided that K was my
duty in opposition TO his candidacy to
publish the statements, which then be-
lieved TO be true.
L thereupon wrote and published the
article which is here complained Of This
publication was intended only as blow
TO Mr. Roosevelts candidacy for the Of
fee he then sought In this publication
acted in entire good faith. believing
that as a publisher I owed the duty TO
my readers to make that statement.
After this ARTICLE was published on
October IL, 1912, neither the plaintiff nor
any one in his behalf Informed me tnat
he claimed the charges SO made were
unfounded, nor did they request me to
make any correction Of the same
Suit Was First Reminder.
"On the contrary. this suit was com
menced on october o. 1912, and the ser
vice of the papers constituted the hrst
.intimation | received that the article was
complained Of
After the commencement Of this SUIT
there was nothing for me TO do but TO
prepare to defend it, ana | did 30 to the
best Of my ability From that time
proceeded to investigate the actual facts
which could be shown by witnesses who
would testify under oath As ! have said,
w 10 the time of the publication my in
formation had been through persons who
claimed TO have knowledge Of the state
ments which had been made. and I went
forward to verify those statements and
determine the witnesses by whom they
could be proved. Additional information
came to me from various sections of the
country. as this case had been given
wide publicity.
Both my attorneys and myself went
forward with the invest CATION OF all this
with great thoroughness, and in numer-
GUS places in various parts Of the coun-
try we found reputable witnesses who
were willing TO swear that from observa-
ton during certain of the addresses and
public appearances Of Mr.. Roosevelt they
believed that he was intoxicated when
they saw him.
I'VE have been unable, however To
find or produce witnesses who will swear
that they have actually seen Mr.. Roose-
welt drink TO excess. Upon this phase
Of the case. when the statements attrib-
uted to such persons were sifted, II
was found in each instance that the
witness did not himself know that Mr..
Roosevelt had drunk TO excess. or that. II
he had made such claim. he was not will
ing to testify
1t is fair to the plaintiff to state that
I have been unable TO find in any sec
ton of the country any individual wit
ness who is willing to state that he has
personally seen Mr.. Roosevelt drink TO
pXCesS