The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1919-03-12
THIRD DAY TRIAL

Court was reconVened at 1875 this
afternoon with Roy Crawford still on
the stand under direct examination.
McKeever took the witness and
asked if he had not talked with Off
Gals about conditions before their Sc
ports We're made on April II. The
witness said he had talked with Off
Gals about the condition Of the booth.
McKeever brought out the fact that
the date of inspection order was April
8. Roy Crawford said he knew of no
inspection made on April 8.
The witness admitted that the re-
port of the officials stating there was
open knob and cleat work was taken to
mean that some of the wiring needed
repairing.
The witness said he did not know
about some of the conditions men,
toned in the report, as he is not an
electrician and is not fully acquainted
with electrical terms.
The witness said the theater was
not in a. dangerous condition.
You put your ineXpert judgment
against the expert judgment of those
who made the tests then?'' Mckeever
asked.
Il do not know that these men
were experts the witness said
The witness said he thought the
by the article in the Topeka State
Journal.
But the article had not been pub
lished," McKeever said.
mo, but we had quit advertising in
the State Journal" the witness said.
McKeever said: you want the jury
to infer that the newspaper influenced
the city inspector in making this re-
port; do you have any evidence to
substantiate this?"
Il do not care to say the witness
replied
eff Won had SI1cI, evidence voI, know
your attorneys would be falling over
each other trying to introduce it,
McKeever said.
At 3 o'clock Roy Crawford con-
cluded his testimony and left the
stand. The court took a recess.
Bouquet for Roy.
Roy Crawford, one of the plaintiffs, and
son of l.. NJ. Crawford, came in for a nice
bouquet when his father was testifying
late Tuesday afternoon. Mckeever. at
torney for the defendant had asked the
witness if Roy was not manager of the
was not authorized to make extensive re-
| of his father.
| have authority to expend large sums OF
| money for repairs, but that he attended to
! any minor repairs that needed attention.
he not?" McKeever asked.
You bet he is" L. NJ. Crawford said
and usually does what / tell him, but he
! is not afraid of me either"
In answer to questions by McKeever
| the witness said he believed Mr.. Mac
| Lehman published the articles about the
! Grand because he had quit advertising
| Mckeever then produced files of the To
! peka State Journal of 1908 to show that
| Mr.. MacLennan criticised Crawford's
| theater and called it a death trap" and
carried advertising for the Crawford thea
ter in the same issue of the paper that
| year. Crawford admitted this was true il
| the files showed it was
J McKeever then began his cross exami
| nation OF the witness as to the profits OF
| the Grand before and after the publica.
| ton of the article. As on direct examina.
| ton the witness attempted to give approx
mate fig from memory and the at
| torney for the defendant asked him if he
| did not have better way of giving the
, profits than his memory. Crawford SAID
! he supposed he could get at the figures
some way and promised to bring hi.
books into court today If he could possibly
do so.
Crawford admitted that the profits a
the Grand began to fall off prior to the
publication of the article. He made thu
assertion that this article caused him t.
fall off more, however. and said it inter
fered with the booking of money making
| attractions. McKeever then asked him /
he could show that the article had KEEP
! attractions away from the opera house anC
the witness admitted he could not offer
| single piece of evidence that would show
| a single attraction had refused to book a
ever, he said he thought many had dom