Show AW Th eOLIen herald libel case Is 1 continued for alie term itt ri mr CC recalled re called lie identified the articles of incorporation of alie HERALD publishing company articles land 9 were read to show the detles bf its officers and the object of the corporation charles F middleton was sworn ic he first saw the article publish edon of june probably in the evan bilgor h avo been in the alie question were you we bf jhc thc direct ora was objected jo and was sustained the still stuck on try ins to prove directors ahe court sald he took this the case suppose the directors had not the power to stop the matter in question stated that so far the is on a fishing expedition they may do this and they may do that 11 so far nothing is proven u the prosecution said they proposed to show that by continuing to employ the writer oatlie article in question and by permitting other similar articles to follow they were liable air ben shocks said if they were sued for that it would be all right but the suit is brought overman article published on june and 2nd for anything which appeared subsequently quent ly the court this matter into consideration and give a decision tomorrow to morrow morning i alie prosecution the wit ness to find the semiweekly semi weekly HERALD which contains the matter which appeared in the daily of june and 2nd and bring it into court in the morning caw hemenway late editor of the ogden daily HERALD and one of the defendants was called was adi toron june and 2nd Was employed by the HERALD publishing company the president odthe company made with him received no information on which the article was based from any one of the defendants fend ants neither from mr middle ton or mr shurtliff dilyou Did you have any conversation with L W shurtliff on the ard 3rd of june respecting that article or its pu no sir did you have any conversation with charles F middleton on that day or the next day about the arti cle aldo not recollect of any I 1 might lave passed him on alio street and made some comment in regard to it was there any meeting in the of nee of the HERALD on that day or subsequent day at which any two or more of them the defendants were present concerning the business of the company v s aw no air 1 have never been present at any meeting jewhen any of them were together on any matter in reference to the business of the company did no one of them call in the office on that day no sir was mr anderson there no sir was he in the editorial room no air did mr flygare consult with you in regard to that article nosir you say you did not obtain the knowledge or information on which you based that article from any one of the defendants that is what I 1 said who issues the paper that is what individual superintend the paper who attends to its circulation I 1 dont know what you amean if mean who published the paper it was no individual who were the individuals on the second of june I 1 cannot name them all there were a dozen or more compositors well not compositors who else mr anderson business manager mr chambers foreman I 1 waa editor who attended to the business of circulation the carriers i attend to the local circulation the mailing clerk sends what did mr anderson do he attended to the books managed the business of the company to what department does the circulation cu belong to the managers department that of anderson has charge v he keeps account of subscriptions and money received rec elved abat part did mr Shur tUff have to do with the management of the paper that day I 1 dont know did any other part than that of a director of the company do you know that time he was a director of the company I 1 dont think I 1 waa aware of the that time you were aware afterwards who the directors of the company were I 1 dont know that I 1 was iwas not aware of it till last ten or fifteen days how long did you continuo as editor after the and 2nd of june I 1 continued till july ath or ath by the court who employed you as editor mr shurtliff I 1 thank mr shurtliff and mr anderaon And ereon came down mr anderson finished the contract I 1 bes giove by counsel for the prosecution when were you employed about the of march this being all the testimony the prosecution wished to introduce before his Honors ruling tomorrow to morrow as to whether be allowed to prove who were the directors or not a recess was taken till ten a in on saturday in the first district court th n morning the following grand and aurora were drawn for the september tormod the court at provo y s CRAND junoir ju thomas ny wi 83 robert martin A win B lake mark low 65 y 13 aw ifa alva porter 49 win II 11 lighter as gordon ellmer wm A halls ca john yieh teu FT church 31 r y i john everett TW jass carver LB stephens Step hein n 1517 Conrad inith ii 0 ftfe t fi ff h t ka a 1 1 I n i I 1 r M ij h I 1 IM J juja i j WS tr Harris TT thomas irvine 88 barnard H green cooj hestelle HE Steele 61 thearie OH Earie I 1 fla jacob jensen pi jeremiah D page 37 crooks george musgrave Muse rave chaa ben J chadwick F 8 richards esq stated to the court that t mr kahlias Kaw liAs wife and daughter are sick and lie asked that the case of nathan kimball vs at D publishing company be continued till some day next week or till some day at the close of the term the prosecution objected to thia proceeding but would prefer under the circumstances to have it continued till the next term ithe court eaid he did not desire defendants to po ahead without the attendance of the counsel of their choice as he had forced them to trial yesterday when several material witnesses were absent and he did not wish to have the case continued for several weeks but he would take the suggestions of in the infuser after a little further consi derti the case was continued the adit lu le divided be iween each side till the november term of the court and the jury waa discharged from this case and also from further attendance on the court for this term in the case jofs G crowley vs 8 H higginbotham to set aside an as eifim ent on the ground that it was fraudulently made the whole matter by consent was placed in the hands of V bierbower as referee to take evi bence and report back to the court the suit of jerusia E murphy against jesse J murphy for divorce bythe court and a decree it with costs was grante d Bic bards represented the defendant and williams con ducted alie cise for the plaintiff an informal recess was then taken |