Show THE LIBEL SUIT THE COURT DECIDE THAT AUSTIN WAS DISHONEST the trial of the austin tribune libel suit came to a close last evening mr rawlins making the closing argument for the plaintiff judge zane delivered a somewhat lengthy charge to the jury ury reviewing the case carefully with reference to the alleged mammoth stock swindle the court said I 1 if the jury find that edwin austin the plaintiff in this case had money of of miss sarah J williams in his custody to loan on real estate that instead of loaning the same on real estate he be for forwarded warde to her for a part thereof shares of the mammoth mining company and appropriated to his own use a sum of money representing such shares at 2 50 each such transactions would be a wrongful appropriation of that money and if the jury further find that at the time of appropriating the funds as aforesaid the said austin induced the said sarah J williams not to return said shares by falsely pretending to her that he be had bad bought this stock at the price of ef 2 50 per share for her by pretending to her that it was waa of that value when he be knew or had bad reason to know that it was of much less value and that he be knew that there were circumstances not yet made public which would greatly decrease and injure its value then such transactions became a fraudulent appropriation of the money to hi his s own use not in the due and lawful execution 01 of his hia trust and the said plaintiff was thereby b guilty of embezzlement words words alleged to be libelous will receive an innocent construction if fairly susceptible of it and when it is uncertain whether they contala contain a defamatory fa imputation the question is one for the jury it if the jury find that the plaintiff in this case acting as the agent of miss sarah J williams reported arted to her that he had purchased for eer her shares of the stock of the mammoth mining ml nine company for the sum of 1250 and that he received that amount and that in fact the said shares only cost and that he appropriated the difference to t disown his own use without disclosing the fact to miss williams then the defendant was thereby guilty of embezzling the said 71 at 7 pm the jury retired with instructions to return a sealed verdict ata at 9 pm they separated having arrived at an agreement the short time that the jury had bad deliberated gave the general impression that the verdict was against mr austin and though nothing definite was known it was no surprise when the verdict was opened this morning morn inc and it was announced that the I 1 jury ury had bad found for the defendent de the verdict being no cause of action mr sheeks of counsel for the plaintiff gave notice that he would move for a new trial in the case |