Show THE LIBEL SUIT i ItJr Kaivllnc makes His Opening I Statement to the Jury In the libel suit of E A Austin vs the Tribune publishing Company 1 jury was at last obtained yesterday afternoon and was in its place this morning ready to hear the case J L Rawlins Esq of Sheets Rawlins Raw-lins attorneys for Austin began by making an opening statement He first I relcrred t the articles upon which the suit was based and theft tooli them up and disposed of them in proper order One of the principal charges was that Austin as ajent for one Mrs Williams had swindled that lady and that he had skipped out to Europe The paper asks I Will the rascal be brought back Mr Rawlins gave a detailed account ac-count of the dealings of Mr Austin Aus-tin with this woman and dwelling at length upon her investing in Mammoth Mam-moth mine stock on Austins advice and stating that Austin had at the Same time invested in the stock personally He aid that it was true Mr Austin had jiivcn Mrs Williams a gloving account of the property but that thin was no more than the circumstances warranted war-ranted He said that the btock was quoted in the defendants paper at a high figure at the time Mrs Williams in vetted In relation to anothpr part of Austins stewardship Mr Rawlins said that on the 22nd of August 1883 Mrs Williams wrote a letter from Elkhorn Colorulo asking Mr Austfn to send her 5000 by the 14 of September as she would oil that date leave foreparts unknown un-known At the time the letter arrived here Mr Austin was at tho lake aid did not return until the 2nd 9f September Septem-ber too late to comply with the request Tho lady however had 1 homo address ad-dress and thinking that i a letter would reach Her there Alistin sent a draft for 1000 to that place This money was afterward returned from the dead letter office Later on ofce Austin learned I that the lady was still in Elkhorn and he addressed li letter to her at that place explaining why he had not sent the letter Later on when Mr Austin was about to leave for London for the purpose of placing the Mammoth stock on the London Lon-don market he left his London address with Marshal Royle Barking Vain Horn and in the defendants dfficu He made no necret of his going but on the other hand it was quite generally known Before leaving he deposited Mrs Williams money in the Du < eret National Bank in the name of E A Austin trustee showing that he had no idea of keeping it in his own name As an evidence of his intention to return he left his home here furnished throughout and furthermore bought a return ticket When he heard of the damaging article that had been printed ho left his business unfinished and returned turned to this city to refute the statements state-ments Going to the editor of the Tribune Tri-bune he offered to explain the matter but was refused a hearing Several Sev-eral communications were sent to the paper by different parties denyint the allegations but they were refused publication In regard to the statement to the effect that Austin has transferred this property to his wife Mr Rawlinssaid that this was of wholo cloth as would be proven and the statement to the effect that he had used Mr Tillett asa as-a tool was of a similar character Referring to Mr Austins connection connecton with the London Bank of Utah Mr Rawlins called attention to the intimation intima-tion that Mr Austin was mismanaging the business and should be looked after by the owners saying Mr Kirby a representative repre-sentative of the stockholders did look into the affairs of the bank and found f them all right He said that Mr Kirby wrote t the Tribune a refutation of these charges and that that paper refused to publish the letter On the whole Mr Rawlins statement was explanative and was listened to with wrapt attention by the jury The defense decided not to make a statement and just before thejnjJSJTTcT cess the taking of evidenctf was begun |