Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-05-06
ADAMS INSISTS
ON PUNISHING
WRONG EDITOR
Can't Understand Separate
Responsibilities of Managing
Editor and the Editor.
CONTEMPT ACTION LAGs

The contempt proceedings insti-
tuted by Claris Adams. prosecutor
/ Of Marion county, against James L.
Kilgallen, managing editor of The
nes, were still pending before
: Judge James A. Collins when court
opened today.
The proceedings were filed by Adams
two weeks ago tomorrow and the de-
PENDANT has been IN court on three dif-
ferent days. on each of which his counsel
has ATTEMPTED to make it plain to Judge
Collins that, although Adams knew at
the time he fled the contempt proceed
ings who was responsible for the alleged
contempt, he had chosen for reasons that
remain to be made public, to bring the
proceedings against the wrong person
At the conclusion Of arguments by
Samuel Dowden, Walter Myers and
Henry n. Spaan, yesterday, the prosecu-
tor was standing alone on his chosen
premises that because Mr.. kilgallen had
acknowledged that he was managing
editor Of The Times he was personally
responsible for the whole editorial policy.
all expressions and every publication Of
the paper
EXPLAINS DIVISION
OF AUTHORITY.
Mr.. KiIgallen, in his answer, which all
legal authorities declare and the prose
cutor acknowledged was binding on the
court, had previously explained that his
duties as managing editor applied to the
direction of the news department and
that such expressions Of editorial opin-
ion and comments as those OF which Mr..
Adams complained were, under the divis-
ion OF authority in the newspaper Office,
under the control OF Robert A. Butler,
who is the editor of The Times.
At no time in the pleadings did Mr..
Kilgallen attempt to disavOw response
biIity for his conduct as managing edi-
tor, but both he and counsel made Il
plain that he was not responsible for the
alleged contemptuous articles, either per
sonally or through his position with The
Times
PROSECUTOR EVADES
THE PROPER COURSE
This point was fully explained 70 the
court by Walter Myers in his argument
on the suhiciency Of the answer TO the
citation, in the course Of which he
pointed out that if a contempt bad been
the proper action would be
acitation against Mr. Butler. who, It
was Acknowledged. had written and
caused to be published the matters for
which Adams was seeking to punish Mir.
KilgalIen-
Mr. Butler was in the courtroom, as
he has been at every hearing In con-
nection with the case, awaiting any in
dication OF a desire on the part OF
Adams to cite him for contempt as the
person responsible for the facts and
opinions which the prosecutor declared
were contemptuous.
ADAMS DEFINITION OF
A MANAGING EDITOR.
Mr.. Adams devoted considerable time
to an effort 20 cover his misstntelnent
as to tie responsibility for che alleged
contempt by arguing that a managing
editor was the directing head OF all
newspaper enterprises, and even vent
os far as 20 portray a managing editor
as corresponding 70 a managing direc-
tor Of a corporation.
At the conclusion Of this rather orgi-
nal definition OF a managing editor he
asked the court to take judicial knOwl-
edge" Of his definition and regard his
statements as undisputed facts. request
that Mr.. Span FASTENED to pronounce as
s'preposterous," with an apology for the
necessity Of applying such term TO the
sSf@ument.
JUDGE SAYS HE
WILL RULE LATER.
Judge Collins asked for citations and
informed the defendant that he would
notify him when he was prepared to
rule on the answer.
The proceedings against Mr.. Kilgsllen
grew out Of the publication OF an appeal
BY The Times 70 the Indianapolis Bar
association for an investigation Of a
statement by Charles w. Robinson 70 the
effect that he had personally appeared
in the grand Jury room and examined
witnesses in behalf OF two clients. and
an editorial concerning the invesbga-
ton Of the conditions that obtained at
the county jail and resulted in the indict-
ment of Sheriff Miller and others.