Evening star., 1937-02-05
DIRECTED VERDICT
GIVEN T|NKHAM IN
CANNON LIBEL SUIT
Truth of Charges Admitted
in Bishops Testimony,
Judge Bailey Rules.
CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
VIOLATED, COURT HOLDS
Trial Ended Abruptly by Order
to Jury-Plaintitf's Attor-
ney Plans Appeal.
BY REX COI'.IER.

Holding that Representative George
Holden Tinkham, Republican, Of
Massachusetts stated the truth when
he charged Bishop James Cannon, jr.,
with violating the corrupt practices
act in 1923, Justice Jennings Bailey
today directed a jury in District Court
to return verdict / favor of Tink-
ham in Cannon's $500,000 libel suit
against the Congressman.
Justice Bailey ended the trial
abruptly at the midway point when
he announced that the Southern
Methodist churchman, by his own
testimony, had admitted violation of
the act.
Since Tinkhams charges-the basis
of the suit-were substantially true"
Justice Bailey said, the motion for a
directed verdict, made yesterday by
Roger j. Whiteford, Tinkh..m's at
torney, was granted. The court had
deliberated overnight on the motion.
AS the jury was settling in the jury
box with the opening of court this
morning. Justice Bailey said:
In this case, the defendant has
pleaded the truth Of the charges made
in the publication and find from the
testimony of the plaintiff and his own
witnesses that he was guilty of violat-
ing the corrupt practices act, and that
the charges made against him are
substantially true
II, therefore. direct you to return
verdict for the defendant"
Jury Instructed to Stand.
The clerk Of the court Immediately
instructed the jury to stand and to
give the verdict directed by the court.
This formality over. Robert H. Nc
Neill, Cannon's attorney, noted an ex-
ception and said he would take the
case to the Court of Appeals
Cannon was acquitted several years
ago of conspiring with his secretary,
Miss Ada Burroughs, to violate the
corrupt practices act in connection
with collection and disbursement Of
funds during the 1923 anti-Smith
campaign.
The churchman sued Tinkham after
the latter had issued a signed state
ment in November, 1880. repeating
some of the charges he had made pre-
viously on the floor of the House in
connection with Cannon's anti-Smith
campaigning.
In this statement Tinkham said the
Southern Methodist churchman was
"a shameless violator of the corrupt
practices act" in that he concealed a
S65,300 anti:Smith contribution re-
ceived from E. C.. Jameson, wealthy
New Yorker, and that he (Cannon)
had refused to testify regarding the
transaction before the Senate Lobby
Committee.
Neither Representative Tinkhsm nor
Bishop Cannon was in court when the
judge announced the directed YER.
dict. Tinkham arrived, however. a
few moments later and jubilantly re-
marked to his attorney, Pretty good.
isn't it?"
Bishop Cannon did not appear at
any time during the trial. The court
was informed he was i'll in Duke Uni
versity Hospital, Durham, N. c.
Whiteford, talking with Tinkham
and reporters in the corridor, declared
the verdict substantiates Tinkham' s
charges. repeated many times. that
Bishop Cannon was Shameless vio-
lator" of the corrupt practices act.
Justice Bailey took the directed ver-
dict motion under advisement follow
in spirited arguments by opposing
counsel yesterday afternoon, out Of
hearing of the jury.
Whiteford Makes Motion.
Whiteford made the motion after
conclusion of the plaintiffs case. The
lawyer asked his move on two conten-
tions: /. That Bishop Cannon has no
rightful claim to damages because he
invited" and demanded" the ale
legedly nbelous statement by Repre-
sentative Tinkham. 2. That Tink-
(See CANNON. Page A-5)