The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1919-03-19
TO THE JURY TODAY
fContinued from Page One.l
Affcrnoon Session.

when court recOnNened at L 0U IHlS
Mckeever resumed his ar
guments before the jury.
McKeever resumed by referring to
the assertion made by Larimer that j.
+. Collins, who made the state inspec-
ton of the Grand. gave out the report
to the Topeka State Journal because
he was bought.
McKeever told of bringing Collins
to Topeka to testify and told the jury
that the counsel for the plaintiffs re-
viewed the history of Collins's life
and that the only thing they were able
to charge him with was that he
worked for his living as a barber-an
honest and reputable pursuit-and
that he was forced to quit school at
an early age because of the death of
his mother.
Mr.. McKeever then referred to the
evidence that nearly broke the camePs
back when ComStock, treasurer or the
Grand testified that business dropped
off following the publication of the
article and then was forced to admit
that business increased after being
shown his own books.
Plaintiffs Not Fair.
McKeever told the jury the plain
tiffS were not fair in that they tried to
hold back facts He said that they
would not bring their books into court
to show their actual losses and re-
minded the jury that l.. NJ. Crawford
tried to testify as to his losses with
out any figures at all. He then told
the jury the plaintiffs were unfair
again in claiming as loss the $1,000
that was expended in rewriting and re-
pairing the theater after the inspec-
tions were made.
The speaker then took up the ques-
lions the court asked the jury to an
Swer in connection with the verdict
He explained the questions and TOLD
ba i1tY-x hny ChnIl1A h6
answered. He told the jury that the
greater part of the testimony of wit
nesses for the defendant were not de.
MED by other sworn witnesses an6
were denied only by the attorneys fol
the plaintiffs who were not under
oath.
Picture of a Possibility.
McKeever painted a vivid picture
of what would happen on the woodeI
platform on the south side of thu
building in case of fire. He pictured
women and children and old men try
! ing to get out by way of this platform
and down the narrow wooden stairwa.
| into what McKeever termed a "de
! horning chute" He pictured tn
! crushed little bodies of children push
ed off the platform and tramped OF
! by the panic stricken crowd. He re
ferred to the statement made by on
of the plaintiffs witnesses that boy
| could jump off the platform.
Gould a little fellow two years oil
have jumped to safety" Mckeeve
| asked. Gould a woman or an age
man have jumped to safety?
Isn't it peculiar that these peopl
do not accuse Mcbride and Collins an
the city inspector of malice?" Nc
Keever asked. They are the one
who made the charges, not Mr.. Mac
| Lehman. Why didn't they sue thes
officials? Maybe they didn't becaus
they thought these officials did nc
have $25,0O0.'
A Long Trial.
The trial of the case has taken u
more time than any civil case on tn
district court dockets in many months
| Twenty-three witnesses were called I
| testify and counsel on both sides wer
into minute details in both direct an
cross examinations. Also. there haV
been many exhibits and much docU
mentary evidence including files of tn
Topeka State Journal. reports frOI
the state labor commissioners Offic
Current Comment editorials an
photographs of the Grand stairway
The plaintiffs in getting their test
mony to the jury have attempted t
show that Mr.. MacLennan knew til
publication of the reports made b
the state and city officials woul
financially injure the Grand and
infer that these reports were pull
lished because the Crawfords had gu
advertising in the Topeka State Joul
nal following an increase in adVe
Using rates
The defendant has contended tn;
the publication of these reports sta
ing the Grand was in an unsafe col
dition was privileged and that it W;
the moral duty of the newspaper
warn the public of this unsafe cond
ton Documentary evidence was il
troduced to show that the defenda1
had previously criticised the Crawfol
theaters when the CraWfords were a,
vertising regularly and witnesses to
the jury that the article published
April II, 1916, was handled in Il
same manner other important stori
are always handled. 1t was show
that Mr.. MacLennan knew nothil
about the reports that were to be ma,
or about the news article containil
the reports until after the aSticle h;
been written and edited and was rea,
to be put in type.
Increase i'm Business
During the examination of wi
nesses and the introduction of eN
dence there were only two inciden
that carried anything of a surprisil
nature. One was when the treasur
of the Grand during April 1916 tes
ned that business began to fall c
Immediately after the publication
the article. Following this statemel
McKeeVer, attorney for the defendal
forced the witness TO admit that t
books kept by this treasurer show
business was larger on the day of t
publication of the article and on {
days following than it had been pr
1 vious to the publication. The Bs
4 tie Cry of Peace" a feature pictul
n was being shown at the Grand duri
the week of April IL and was bel
I shown both before and after the pu
I LEGATION of the article.
The other surprise came Tuesd
4 afternoon when Frank p. MacLenn
I was on the stand. 1t had been CO