The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1919-03-11
Tells of History of Grand Since
1t Was Built in 1882.
Editorial "What's the Matter
With Topeka" Read in Court.
STATEMENTS TO THE JURY
Plaintiff Attorney Reads State
Journal Articles.
Defendant Attorney Says 1t
Was Duty to Give the Facts.

FROM TODAY'S COURT CALENDAR
THE DISTRICT COURT
First Division.
r. d. CARVER. JUDGE
CIVIL JURY CASES.
Tuesday. March IL.
301O3-Amusement Synd. Co v MacLen-
315iii1Siivers V. Howard. admr. Is
:;049a-Farmers' st. Bk- V. Abbott. ....... )
collaboration St Bk- V. Britain ...... 35
319OS-Decker V. MacLennan -.....-......2I
When Judge Carver opened his di-
vision of the district court at o'clock
this morning he asked attorneys in
the case of the Amusement Syndicate
company, of which the Crawfords are
the principal stockholders, against
Frank P. MacLennan, how long they
thought il would take to complete the
case. Joseph Waters answered that
he thought it would take the balance
of the week. Then Judge Carver ex-
cused all witnesses in the Decker
MacLennan case and in all other cases
until Thursday morning next at 8
o'clock.
TOday's Proceedings.
The first evidence offered in the
case of the Amusement Syndicate
company against MacLennan was
presented by Joseph Waters. attor-
nev for the plaintiffs, who read to the
Jury, which was sworn in late MONDAY
afternoon, the article in which it was
stated the Grand opera house was
dangerous and unsafe. Waters read
the reports made by both the city and
state officials after they had made in
spections. These reports gave the de-
tails of the unsafe conditions the city
and state officials had found when
they made their inspections.
After reading these reports Waters
read the article published along with
them. Copies of the paper of April
IL, 1916, were shown to the jurors.
Waters Reads Editorials.
Waters next read extracts from the
editorial columns of the Topeka State
journal in which it was explained that
it was the duty of the Topeka State
journal to tell of the unsafe condi-
tions of the Grand opera house. re-
Eardless of whether or not the Craw-
fords and the Amusement Syndicate
Co. were advertising patrons of the
paper.
In this editorial the fact that To-
peka is not the theater city it has
been in years past was referred to and
the great success L. NJ. Crawford has
made in Topeka was shown. In this
editorial Mr.. MacLennan expressed
the wish that Crawford erect a mod
ern theater in Topeka that not only
would be absolutely safe for the pub
lie to attend and a credit and pride to
Topeka, but that would also be a
monument to L. NJ. Crawford and to
his great success as a theatrical man.
Waters attempted to read from re-
cent editorials in the Topeka State
Journal and McKeever, attorney for
the defendant objected to having any
thing read that did not concern the
case.
Current Comment" Editorials to Jury.
Waters said that some of the edi-
torials under the heading of Current
Comment" could not be separated so
that only the parts referring to the
case could be read.
The court ruled that anything re-
lating to the case could be read but
that other parts referring to the North
American hotel, Chamber of Com
merce and other matters not having a
bearing on the case would not be per-
mitted.
Waters stated he wanted to read
these editorials in an effort to show
!. malice.
; McKeever then informed the court
as he had previously informed the
jury. that the defendant had nothing
to conceal and that the bars were
down permitting the introduction OF
anything that was desired.
"Whats the Matter With Topeka -
Shortly after 10 o'clock Waters be-
gan reaulnC Ine i've COlu1nn edllOr1a
that recently appeared in the Topeka
State Journal under the heading
What Is the Matter With Topeka p
The reading of that editorial, printed
few weeks ago. created grea
amusement and many smiles from
those in the court room, including
several grins from Roy Crawford him
self. one of the plaintiffs.
After reading at length from til,
five-column editorial, Waters reaC
the Amusement Syndicate Co lbe
suit was mentioned. In one of thes.
Current Comment editorials com
ment was made on the opinion tn,
public would have of newspapers i
they followed the tactics of certain
lawyers who have filed the libel suit
now pending against Frank P. Mac
Lehman.
An extract from another of thes
Current Comment editorials wa
read in which Mr.. 11acLennan said h.
would prefer to be devoting his tim
to something that would benefit To
peka but is prevented from doing s.
to the extent he would like becaus
his time is so greatly taken up witt
compelled attention to the libel suits
At 1895 the court took a short re
cess.
Court reconvened just before 1
o'clock.
L. NJ. Crawford First Witness.
L. NJ. Crawford was called and whel
the court took its noon recess he wa