Arizona republican., 1919-04-03
FILE SENSATIONAL MOTIONS IN LIBEL
 SUIT FUR S1OO,00O

Louis B. Whitney, assistant attorney general and legal advisor to the idse legislature is asked by certain lawyer defendants in the s100,00O libel acton brought by Whitney against the Jour nal Miner company and members Of the Northern Arizona Bar aSSociatlon to make his complaint more definite ana certain, in that he be required to state his connection, if any, with the l. W. w. Whitney. as counsel for John Stan field who after being deported from Jerome in July 1917, as an alleged l. w. w. brought suit against the United Verde Copper company, Yavapai county officers, ct al for s30,000, was -criticlse2 by the northern association. 4te mdt | their alleged attack with the libel aaefop which was given a sensational turn vest terday with the filing of motions, affl- davits and denials of the courts Jurls- | diction.
 Whitney stated that the case}was ten | tatively set for today but that his fail ure to get in touch with counsel for i the defense would result in the argu- ments on the motions not coming upI before Judge Stanford until week, ] from Saturday.
 1 It is understood that bitter fight i will be made to have the case tried in Yavapai county, where all the defen- dantS reside.
 A. H. Favour, E. s. Clark and Le Roy Anderson, three of the defendants, 1 through their attorneys, H. H. Linney, A. G. Baker and Howard Cornick, in their motion that the complaint be made more definite and certain, declare that the precise nature of the charge is not apparent and that under the ale .1. ,frAxr ficiently apprised of the nature of the alleged wrongs. They ask that Whit ney be required to state whether or not at any time mentioned in the complaint 1 or upon any of the occasions mentioned therein, he and John Stanfield, or eith- CT of them, were memoerS of the l. W. W. organization or in any matter directly or remotely affiliated with, or sympathizers with, the l. W. W. asso- citation or it's members.
 The defendants ask that Whitney be required also to state whether or not in representing John Stanfield as his attorney in the action, he, (Whitney) counselled or advised the l. w. w. or
 ganization or any of it's members.
 He is asked also to point out where
 in the publication of the article which appeared in the Journal Miner which gave offense refers to him.
 Charging that for the convenience of witnesses the suit should be removed
 to Yavapai county, the defendants also
 assert that they believe the ends of
 justice would be promoted by change
 of venue of the action.
 Whitney in his complaint alleges that
 anyone reading the article which ap-
 peared in the Journal Miner would
 have cause to suspect ana believe that
 he was disloyal in conduct to the Unit
 ed States"
 The article to which the attorney
 took exception appeared in the October
 s issue under the headlines: Ear As , Sociation Takes Swat at Wobblies. At
 torneys Set Forth Their Stand as to
 Handling Cases Filed by Alleged Sons
 of Perpetual Unrest"
 Incorporated in the article were reso- r lutions drawn by leading lawyers who
 en masse volunteered their services . free to the defendants in the action : brought by Stanfield against the United , Verde Copper company ct al it being the opinion of the lawyers" said the
 Journal Miner, that it was a clear cut
 case of persecution of the county of
 ficers, copper firms and leading citizens , of the county who had job of chasing
 a party of alleged wobblies out oi {,
 | The bar association held an attorney
 representing client of the character
 of wobblies were deserving of condem. nation, as especially pointed out in z 7 section of the resolution reading: "Whereas-The plaintiff in those ! actions are represented by attorneys
 and Louis B. Whitney, and if said at.
 torneys are members of or sympathiz
 CTS with the I. w. W. or in any man, ner directly or remotely affiliated witt the organization, we believe it is oul ' duty as officers of the court of thi.
 commonwealth to register our condem.
 nation of such attorney and of thei h selling or giving their services to client.
 of that character and lending their ait f to such an organization
 : Whitney contends that the alleged c attack caused him to be considered
 guilty of unprofessional and disgrace
 ful conduct.
 The Prescott paper held stated tn a resolutions epitomized the sentiment o e the bar regarding the wobbly situation t as it pertained to actions in the loca s courts It stated that the members o t the local bar were not in sympathy witt f any movement or organization whicl s smacks of wobblyism and that the at Q torneys do not hold in great esteen
 any member of the fraternity who vii
 accept the task of defending so calle IT disciples of treason.
 l. Besides the Journal Miner and tn '- three attorneys mentioned who aske l. for a change of venue, the other de
 fendants are John A. Ellis, F. W. O'Sul = livan, T c. Norris. Joseph H. Morgan
 Daniel F. Parks, J. F. Russell, J. N <. Mines and Percy Mines.
 1 The action in which Whitney is rep
 fesenting Stanfield is still pending i a the superior court of Yavapai count. Q Stanfields suit is against the Unite .t Verde Copper company, the Fidelit ' and Deposit company of Marylan' II Joseph Young, Ed Block, Robert l Tally, Charles Clark and John H. Rob k inson. Stanfield instituted court pro h ceedings on the ground that he was hel IS in jail without any lawful warrant ( l. authority, and that he was deprived ( ,z his liberty for IA days.
 10 It is alleged that Stanfield was anon
 the 70 deported from Jerome and place = on the train and sent to Needles, wher - they were refused entrance by the au e thorities. They were returned to King E man, where they went their sever; 2 ways.