The Alaska citizen., 1917-09-03
duly sworn, testified on

quamD
 e MT Caskey. you're the defend, ant in this case
 A Yes. sir.
 c. And you're the owner and pub fisher of The Citizen
 A Yes, sir.
 e How long have you been ope- rating and conducting that paper
 A. In the neighborhood Of eight or nlne years as weekly. daily since last September.
 c Daily since September Who is the editor of the paper, Mir caskey, al the present time
 A. Well, I'm the editor, have an editorial writer, bu, am the editor myself
 Q. Who IS the editorial writer you speak of?
 A. MT. Carl Fitchett
 Q. How long has he heen con nected with the paper?
 A. Since the first of the month
 Q. He came from the Outside with you, did he?
 A. brought him in with me, yes. sir.
 Q You are charged in this com plaint, being q complaint for crim- inal libel, with having published in The Citizen an article under the heading of Patriotism for Profit" which appeared in the issue of the eighth of the present month. I'll ask you if that is the article which you as editor authorized the publica ton of?
 A. Yes, sir
 c. That's not your writing, is it. MT. Caskey?
 A Nc, sir, it is not.
 c. II was written by
 A It was written by Mir Fitchett
 Q. But for which you're respons ible?
 A, I'm responsible entirely, yes, sir.
 c. Why was that article written? What was the purpose of writing that editorial? (After argumenO.
 A. Why, the object in writing that editorial was for the purpose Of re- futing or replying to an editorial in the News-Miner of the evening previous. (After motion and 
 Q. l will hand you a paper, the News-Mner of August 7th, 1917, which has been identified by MT. Thompson as an editorial written and published by him as of that date, and ask if that is the editorial to which the editorial in The Citizen of the following day is reply?
 A. IL is, yes, sir.
 MT. Marquam-We offer that in evidence. (Objection, extended argu- ment and adjournmenD.
 Session of August l6th, l917
 O. (After ruling on offer of pre- vious session. MT, Caskey, you tes- tified yesterday that the editorial which is the basis of this criminal prosecution was a reply to the arti- Cle appearing in the News-Miner of the night before which was just ad- mitted in evidence?
 A. Yes, sir.
 O. What part of that editorial, if any special part, is it directed 10, and was the cause of the necessity of a reply in your opinion? (Objec- ton and argumenU.
 A Well, there is one part there wherein he states that I always op- posed anything that the government ever done and where MT Thompson upholds all of their actions with my 
 Q. Had that policy or similar policy with regard to the conduct of yourself in the newspaper business been promulgated by the News Miner prior to that time, or was this the first instance (Arter objection and 
 A Yes, sir.
 Q. You remember the question? (Question repeated).
 A. Yes, sir.
 o. l understand the answer goes to the fact that same policy had been pursued prior to that time?
 A Yes, sir.
 Q. In the testimony of some of the witnesses yesterday. MT. Caskey, 1t was stated on the stand, apparent ly by voluntary statements, but any how it is in evidence, that The Citi- zen at the time the question of the