Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1913-05-29
ALL attest TO
TED 5 SOBR|ETY
ALI TESTIMONY SHOWED HE
WAS EXTREMELY TEMPER
ATE WITH ALCOHOL.
Newspaper men testify
Had Heard Report That lie Was u
Drunkard but Regarded 1t as
Extremely Silly"

Extremely silly"
MARQUETTE, Mich. May 2S.-
Men who have been associated with
Theodore Roosevelt in public and
private life, who met him on the Nile
when he returned from his African
hunting trip, and newspaper men
who accompanied him In his various
political campaigns, testified today In
Colonel Roosevet's suit against Geo.
a. Newett, a newspaper owner of Is
pemlng, Mich, that the former pres
dent was not a drunkard, but that he
was notably extremely temperate in
the use of intoXicants. 1t would have
been impossible the witness said. for
Colonel Roosevelt ever to have been
under the influence of liquor without
the fact becoming known to his asso-
eiates. 1t would have been equally
impossible for him to have drunk
liquor with any regularity without
the smell Of 1t on his breath being
apparent.
Teddy Well Pleased.
Throughout the hearing of the case,
IN which the former president Is sue
ing for $4,000 damages because of
the publication last October Of an
editorial charging him with getting
drunk, Colonel Roosevelt listened
with every evidence ot satisfaction to
the testimony of former members of
mis- cabinet and of newspaper men.
Frequently he smiled as some Incl
dent of his campaigns or hunting
trips was related from the witness
stand.
once Colonel Roosevelt gave vent
to an audible chuckle. This was
when Robert Bacon, former secretary
of state, in telling of his acquaint-
snce with members of the Roosevelt
family, said the colonel was the faith
er of five children, although he has
six.
For almost six hours of testimony
taking, or argument by attorneys,
Colonel Roosevelt occupied his chair
just Ddch OF MS counsel.
No Hearsay Evidence.
Tho days proceedings were mark
ed by an important ruling by Judge
Richard c. Flanagan, which in the
Introduction of evidence by the de-
fence, will have the effect of excIud-
ind certain kinds of hearsay evidence.
This ruling came after q prolonged
argument during which the jurors
Were excluded from the room, and
after attorneys for Colonel Roosevelt
had asked for the exclusion of GER
tain kind of testimony, which they
said might be introduced by the de-
fense through depositions.
The effect of the ruling was that
Colonel Roosevelts reputation Is an
Issue in the case and testimony bear
ing upon his reputation may be in
troduced, but that rumors about his
reputation coming from persons not
qualified by experience to Judge, shall
not be admitted. In the future of the
hearing, a person who has travelled
extensively with the former president
or who has been associated 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
few moments, in crowd may not
testify as to his general reputation
although he may tell how the colonel
acted or appeared at that time.
James II. Pund and William H.
Van Benshoten, Colonel Roosevelt's
attorneys. said the rulings were agree
able to them. Horace Andrews. one
of Mr.. Newetts counsel, declared the
present action was a semi criminal
case" and pleaded for an unrestricted
ruling on the admission of evidence
All Denied 1t.
Almost every phase of Colonel
Roosevelts public life was touched
upon by todays witnesses. All OF
them spoke with emphasis when they
expressed personal knowledge in
denying as the editorial charges that
the colonel gets drunk, and that not
infrequently, and "all his intimate
friends know it,"
1t was asserted that whenever Col
onel Roosevelt drank champagne or
wine, or mint julep, it was out OF
courtesy to his host at Some public
function, that he often only took a
mouthful from a wineglass and that
on one occasion he ordered railroad
company not to place in his special
car the supply of liquors usually