New Britain herald., 1915-05-19
BOWERS SUMS OP CAS
 FOR gla ROOSEVELT
Barnes Suit Brought 10 'leWer De-
 fendaat Before People Of J. 5"

Syracuse, N. Y., May 19.-John M. Bowers, chief counsed for Theodore sRooseyelt, today summed up in the supreme court here the case of the l, defense in William Barnes suit against the. former president of the United states for libel. He attacked many of the statements of fact made upon the witness stand by the plaintiff, and argued that his client was Justified in saying the things he did about the plaintiff. The lawyer contended that the suit was not brought with the purpose of securing pecuniary damages or personal yindication, but E to lower the defendant before the Ipeople of the United States"
 Counsel for MT. Barnes were to sum zup the case of the plaintiff during the Afternoon.
 Denies Motion for Barnes.
 During the day Justice Andrews presiding, denied q motion to instruct {the jury to find a verdict for MT. kBarncs and ruled that the jury would knot be allowed in it's deliberations to sconsieer the allegation that the ar ticle upon which the suit is based was privileged because the plaintiff |1yas in public life and political cam Paign was in progress at the time of Is publication.
 Upon the opening of court, Henry r. Wolf, of counsel for MT. Barnes, made a motion to strike from the rec Prd evidence regarding printing elicit Ed from the plaintiff on cross-exaini- hation. The motion was denied.
 "A motion that the jury be- directed "a find verdict for the plaintiff was hen made. This was based primar- upon the ground that no evidence Justification had been offered for arious portions of the alleged hbel- eps article which the court had held ko be libel per SC. MT. Wolf called Particular attention to that part of Xhe article upon which the suit was based in which MT. Barnes name gas linked with that of Charles IF. turphy,s and in which it was stated nat MT. Murphy was aided and abet- Id by MT. Barnes Based Upon Alleged Happenings. Mir. Wolf laid particular emphasis pom the fact that much of the evil ence offered in justification was based oon alleged happenings of many ears ago. Justice Andrews, in reply, said he hd decided to restrict the jury's con Ideration to two charges namely Be general charge in the entire ar Ele complained of, that there was a Prrupt alliance between MT. Barnes 1 Charles F. Murphy, and that MT. arnes worked through an alliance 1 tween crooked business and crooked ! Rlitics.
 Rights Of Jury.
 Iii regard to, the first charge. Jus e Andrews said the jury had a 1 lit to consider the evidence in re- I'd to the alleged combination that 1 claimed have resulted in the dead l K of 1911 over the selection of a tied States senator. Tn regard to l
 second charge, he said the justi- htion seemed to be based upon evil nce regarding conversations be- Den the plaintiff and defendant 1 put 'sfifteen years ago. The motion direct the jury to find verdict favor Of the plaintiff was then de- ustice Andrews later remarked l
 no question of privilege would
 submitted to the jury. The fact,
 said, that there was a political 1 lpaign in progress at the time of l
 publication of the alleged libel 1
 Ie nc difference, and if the allega-
 Is in the article were not estab-
 Rd then the individual named in
 article had been libelled and the
 must determine the amount of
 tive damages.
 IT. Bowers then began to sum up
 case of the defense