Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 36, Number 64, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 April 1904 — The Babcock Libel Case. [ARTICLE]

The Babcock Libel Case.

One of the three-. prosecutions for libel ia which Commissioner A. Halleck is the complaining witness and Editor F. K. Babcock, of the Jaspe r County Democrat is defendant, began Wednesday, at Kentland, before E. B. Sellers, of Monticel o, as special judge. The jury is understood to ba about evenly divided politically, being 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats. Thisparticular case was based crrr au article whieh appeared m the Democrat in April, 1003. soon after a case Mr Babcock had won against the commissioners had been appealed to the Supreme Court In this article the' Democrat called Mr. Hnlleek a “ci: ,” said he had 820,00 V of unsatisfied judgements pending against him. and plainly intimated that he had no financial, credit or s tanding.. '...

The article also asserted that at a meeting of the county council where two of the members wanted to make in appropriation and pay M r.„Babcock*9 judgment for print-, tng ballots, that Mr Halleck gave the council plainly to understand that he wts running Jasper county and would fight Mr. Babcock’s judgment to the last ditch. Mr. Ha'leek frankly explained his financial difficulties on the witness stand They all dated from the disastrous failure of the DeMotte Canning Company, in which he was largely interested and lost very heavily; ajid he showed that, by great sacrifices, he had paid all claims against him except about 11,500 worth. He also showed by Councilmen. J. w. Williams and Walter Porter and by the other two commissioners, that he made no claim tubs “running the county, - ’ nor indulged in any threats about fighting Mr. Babcock's judgment, all that he said, being that the point of law- whether commissioners could allow for any purpose a larger amount than had been appropriated, ought to be settled by the Supreme Court

Many other articles from the Democrat tending to show the malice of the editor, were placed in evidence. _Tor the defense, it was shown that the Democrat pub'shed a correction of its previous article, in which it was exp’ained that the ‘•$20,000 in judgments,” in the previous artie'e was a ‘ typography cal error” for 20 unsatisfied judgments, though how the printer* came to make so remarkable an error, and how, when made, it passed the scrutiny of the editor as he read the proof, was not made very clear.

The defendant also denied that he had ever harbored any malice towards Halleck when he attacked him in his paper, and that ev< n to call a man a ‘ cur” in a newspaper was a common practice and not considered more than mildly abusive;. Both complainant and defendant were put through rigorous cross examinations by the opposing at-

torneys. The rulings of the court seem to be eminently fair and impartial. The attorneys for t e state, are Prosecuting Attorney Si k assisted by VV H. Parkison; and for the defendant, E, P. Honan, and Jesse E. Wi'son, of Rensse aer and Judge Wm. Darroch, of Kentland.

The case was not concluded when we went to press, but guesses on a disagreement were the prevailing sentiment. The other two cases pending against Mr. Babcock, and set for trial this term were continued until next term. f Easter hats and bonnets up-to-date and reasonable prices all cordially invited to call nnd inspect Friday and Saturday April Ist and

2nd'

MRS, PURCUPILE.