The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1919-06-11
BILL|NGSLEY WAS
RATHER POINTED|N
TALK TO ROBINSON
Even Threatened Physical
Violence, According to
Witnesses.
with HIS LITTLE CANE
Inter esting Testimony
About Wealth of the
Defendant.
WITH HIS LITTLE CANE

Until Glenn F. Barns testified in the
Robinson-Bi Billingsley slander suit this
morning, the word "penltentiary" had
never been used in the description of
what Morgan Billingsley, the defend
ant, said to C. w. Robinson, the plain
tiff in the Peoples National Bank on
November 1, 1917. According to Mr..
Barns the following words were ut
tered by Billingsley on that occasion ::
You are damn rascal and ought TO
be in the penitentiary"
The words that were in the "decla-
ration" and in the testimony of C. w.
Robinson and the testimony OF F. NJ.
McElfresh, previous witnesses were
that Mr.. Robinson should be in
Howard Showalters' place" and not
that he should. be in the "peniten-
tiary."
: Judge Raymond held that the word
"penitentiary" was not used in the
declaration" when a question came
up as to Just what Attorney Harry
Shaw, representing the plaintiff, could
ask F. NJ. McElfresh, the first wit
ness, in his effort to refresh" the
memory of the witness who testified
that he was not in the habit OF charg-
ing his memory with trivial bicker-
ings, or quarrels or alterations.
There was something said about
$780," testified Mr.. McEIfresh. "I
don't pretend to say what 1t (the con.
troversy or altercation) was about"
Mr. Show asked him who said some.
thing about $500 and he replied that
it was Mr.. Billingsley. Mr.. McElfresn
recalled that Mr. Robinson spoke to
the people in the bank requesting them
to pay attention to the talk"
You have not thought less of Mr..
Robinson since the quarrel with Mr..
Billingsley than you did before?" ask
ed Congressman Neely, attorney for
the defense.
Mr.. Shaw objected to this question
claiming that it was an effort to use
the plaintiffs witness for the defense.
He held that even II Mr. McElfresh
was the defendants witness the Ques-
ton would not be proper. II the Sian.
der did not have its desired effect
that point does not figure In the case,
according TO Mr.. Shaw. He claimed
that the law presumes damages; that
actual damages do not have to be
proved.
Mr. McElfresh told the story that
!. he was 81 years of age and that he had
known both the plaintiff and the de.
fendant for IL years.
Did you hear Mr.. Billingsley use
any words to the efrect-began Mr..
Shaw, but here Congressman Nicely
objected to the question. Major Neely
held that the witness should tell all
he heard and all he could remember,
but claimed that the attorney for the
plaintiff was refreshing" the memory
Of the witness by inferring In his Ques-
ton what other witnesses had testi-
fled, and that when this was done it
was useless to keep the witnesses
from the court room during the trial O:
the case, as has been the practice.
-This case is case in which the word
itself is the important thing" explain
ed Congressman Neely.
Arch E. Sandy. assistant cashier of
the Peoples National bank, was the
next witness for the plaintiff. Mr..
Sandy told that he had been connect
ed with that banking institution for
seven years and that he was acquaint-
ed with both Billingsley and Robin.
SON.
did you see Mr.. Robinson in TIE
bark that day." asked Mr.. Shaw. Yhe
CONTINUED on page eight.O