The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1919-03-19

that the Crawfords knew nothing
about the action of the city and state
officials in declaring the opera house
unsafe until the day the article con-
tanning the reports was published !
When Mr.. MacLennan was on the
stand, McKeever. his attorney, brought
out the fact that Roy Crawford had
held d consultation with city and state
officials on April 10, the day before
publication of the article. in which
the unsafe condition of the moving
picture booth and other defects in
the opera house were discussed Nc
Keever also brought out the fact that
an article telling of this consultatlop
was published in the Topeka State
Journal on the afternoon of April 10,
in which officials were quoted as say
ing that if the Crawfords continued
to use the defective booth and any
thing happened,they would be entirely
to blame.
State journal Ethics.
! During the cross-exanlination Of both
! A. J. Carruth. jr., managing editor OF 10
peka State Journal. and frank L: oi Mo- Sor
| Lehman, defendant. Thursday. counsei lor
the plaintiffs ATTEMPTED e b to bpineine out
| the fact it is the policy of the Iopeka Snate
Journal to publish the news ana the truth,
! regardless of friendships or advertising
! would you Just because there was asa
public record of charges against a very
personal friend of yours publish these
! CHARGES even if YOU knew them to be false?"
| counsel asked Mr.. MacLennan.
IF there was a public record contain
ing charges against a friend that we knew
F., to be false would probably puonsh1
and if we knew them to he false we would
| so state in connection with their puolica-
ton" Mr.. MacLennan answered ,+o;nir,
/ IF there was public record containing
charges against a woman that you knew 10
| be false and you knew would rum her
| reputation would you publish II: counsel
asked,
I'm case where womans reputation
was at stake we very likely would not, the
witness replied. The State Journal recoG-
niZeS womanhood.
In asking his questions the attorney I4r
| ness TO TnsRer his questions with direct
'syeses" and 1oes'' without giving him a
chance to exNain his answers.
/ Attorney Waters for the Crawfords OBJ
iected to any explanations by Mr. Mac
objections, saying, Give the witness
Attorney Waters asked Mr.. MacLennan a
very long involved question
MIR. MacLennan said: will Captain
Waters please repeat the question he asks
Attorney Waters started TO repeat it. but
not being able to do So asked the court
stenographer. George Kline, to repeat 1t
The stenographer read. but the question
was so involved and complicated that he
could make nothing of it, whereupon At
torney Waters asked a new question III
lieu of it, which Mr.. MacLennan answered
Advertising Rates.
, Mr. MacLennan was asked If the Craw-
fords had not spent with him during the
past thirtv-three years, about $4,000 fol
! advertising.
: the amount, but if they had spent that
! | much money with him he had given the
Crawfords more than that in return or tht
Crawfords would not have paid for the ad
vertising simply to get their money back
| Mr. 'MacLennan was asked if there wert
any other advertisers that stopped adver
5 Using when the rates were raised
: | He replied: There were. The Pelletlel
, | Stores stopped advertising and EmahlZer
: Spielman. The Crawfords resumed ad
: vertising before these other two. Most
onr advertisers did not take out their ad
vertising but reduced their spaces: We die
not expect a great deal from the Crawford
thru the spring and summer because 1t wa
, the off season for theatricals and very feV
81 attractions were given at the Grand in tn
/ summer"
= Mr. MacLennan was asked If he held an.
= malice against the Crawfords, OF Pelletieri
I or Ema hizer- pielman because they stopped
i advertising. lie said he did not.