| Show acha FOR ATTORNEY SKEEN at the time the libel suit was brought in her name against tho standard publishing co had a twelve year old girl read the paper to her containing the account of her husbands arrest in the case of alice lewis richards vs the standard publishing company which is an action for libel the time of judge J S Chlde court was taken up today with the opening statement of the prosecution and the testimony of witnesses for that side mrs alice lewis richards was the principal witness and she under cross examination admitted that while she was working for J D skeen the action for libel was decided upon she also admitted her inability in part to read the articles in the standard and stated that she had a girl twelve years old road the paper for her at the time the story of the arrest of her hubband was published in his opening statement to the jury outlining the case for plaintiff attorney J D skeen waived claims for punitive and actual damages and announced that the standard and examiner were newspapers of wide circulation and influence and that william glasmann was manager of both publications cat ions he added also bv way of an exhaustive tha t the plaintiff in the cause now before tho court was the wife of thomas D richards who had been accused of rape and by reason of such accusations and the general publication of the same plaintiff had been humiliated and ignored by former friends and companions at ogden and other parts of the state mrs alice lewis richards plaintiff in the action was then called to the witness seat and under interrogations from attorney skeen said she had been a resident of ogden for six years and previous to coming to this city had resided at brigham city and paradise for several years she was the mother of several children some of whom resided at ogden and the others at brigham city witness had been married twice and the children were the issue of her farst union she had no children by her present husband here attorney horn for the defense objected to the questions submitted to witness by attorney insisting that they were leading and influencing the replies from witness and the court sustained the objections continuing the witness said she wag at home on july 12 1905 when a copy of the ogden standard was thrown into her yard and that she read a statement therein which caused her mental anguish and the article in question was subsequently to her by the twelve year old daughter of mrs greggs a neighbor mrs richards replying to questions from her attorney reiterated hat since the publication of the articles referred had been cast out by former friends and acquaintances this in substance subs fance was the gist of tea almony given by the plaintiff under a rigid ross by attorney farnsworth for the defense sirs richards charUs Ri in tracing where she had lived displayed an ignorance of the common rules of arithmetic that was almost painful to those present she insisted that 8 and 7 made thirty and was entirely entire lj at a loss where tho application of simple addition was necessary As a material witness in her own behalf tho woman was a failure arid her evidence under the kindly barnsworth worth was devoid of any feature to sustain the complaint made she maintained that although the mother of avo grownup grown up children some of whom married she was but 38 years of age and that she was born at north ogden that her father was a grist miller at paradise where the family moved when ahe wag a child and that she know how old she was when he died she was married to her present husband at Brig baro city and he was employed as a grader on the railroad there afterwards he moved the family or part of it at least to ogden where the family resides at present her daughter olivia the little girl alleged to be mixed up in the trouble resides in this city but has her homo at present with mrs lightfoot Licht foot where she has resided since two or three days after T D richards arrest was made on what was believed to be a serious charge reverting once more to the newspaper article referred to witness said she could read a little herself but to make sure that ahe had understood and grasped the sense of the article had requested little eva Gregg sr a child 12 years of age to read it aloud to her she was shocked at the nature of the story told but wag more shocked and horrified at the arrest of her hubband T D richards on so serious a charge as was made witness believed her husband was arrested on monday morning july 11 and that the article was published in the standard the following day she was a subscriber to the semiweekly semi weekly standard at the time and was a subscriber to the paper at the present alme and had not quit taking the standard oven after the publication of the objectionable arriolo arti olo questioned further by attorney farnsworth mrs richards said she was at her home when the patrol wagon came after richards and she was told by detective fender and another officer to follow the prisoner to the city jail by the next street car and to taake her daughter olivia with her at this point attorney skeen objected to the method of cross exam and the court overruled the objection and told witness to proceed with her answer continuing in reply to questions from counsel farnsworth Farna worth mrs richards said after she arrived at alie jail she wais shown into a room occupied by her husband then under arrest and detective ponder and an othor officer took her little daughter out into another room to question her subsequently the little girl and witness were to the office of a physician where an examination 0 olivia was made here attorney skeen objected to the nature or result of the examination being gone over and alie court sustained the objection resuming the cross examination along a different line attorney farnsworth brought out of witness the fact that viola one of lier daughters had lived with the family of attorney J D skeen plaintiffs attorney soon after the arrest but witness could not remember how long and that later she had resided with a mrs johnson where she was subsequently married witness admitted that sno was working for attorney skeea when the present suit for libel was instituted but she remember signing tho complaint before moroni skeen questioned closely by counsel for the defense witness tacitly a that certain conditions and a contract were entered into between herself and her attorney in reference to the suit but the real facts were not brought out owing to a vigorous objection on the part of attorney who was evidently deeply and profoundly interested in closing off witness at that point and claimed the contract was confidential attorney horn we desire to show if your honor please that in his wild dream of reform and the like attorney skeen has been soliciting people to institute suits tor libel against both the standard and the examiner and that he has done the same in the case now before abo court resuming the cross examination tomey farnsworth asked mrs richards if she was ashamed to repeat tho conversation she had with mr skeen in reference to her suit witness replied in the negative and gazed at her legal representative in a dazed and helpless manner replying to objections made by attorney skeen in reference to the char actor of questions ached judge chodos ter ruled that anything in the nature of payments to her attorney might bo asked at this time attorney farnsworth to witness did vou pay attorney skeen any cash to institute this suit for you witness yos y o s in a hesitating and embarrassed manner but I 1 do hot remember how much attorney farnsworth see it you cannot remember a little more definitely just what you paid mr skeen if anything witness I 1 think I 1 paid him about or ilke that for mj case but do not remember for a cor dainty D T tracy assistant business manager of the standard was the next witness called he aard in substance that mr glasmann was manager of the standard during tho year 1905 when the alleged libel occurred but that mr glasmann was absent at the almo at portland oregon in attendance at the exposition tho witness stated that ho was la charge of the business office at the time and that tho publication of news matters of any description was under the personal control of the managing editor and that the business office had nothing to do with that department the circulation department of the standard and examiner was in charge of a regular circulator at that time who paid tor the paper and collected from subscribers himself certain receipts for subscription and advertising go through the business office and pass from the collectors to the cashier and from the latter goes to the bank in the regular order of business without the business manager knowing anything about the details of auch transactions mr tracy was then excused but was advised that he would be placed on the stand again with certain books of the standard publishing co to show the subscription hat of the newspapers referred to |
