Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, January 29, 1890, Page 5

- PAUL'S BIG UNDERTARIN Vandervoort Must Show the Truth of His Defamatory Charge. THE ARGUMENTS IN THE CASE. Mr. Hall Had a FPeculiar Theory Wh.ch the County Attorney An- nihilated with Neatness and Legal Citations. The Arguments. Coveral hundred people leanod over the rails at the police court yesterday morning for two hours listening to the arguments in the case of the State vs Paul Vandervoort and J. C. Wileox, charged with haviog criminally libeled Mr. Rosowator. Tho briofs in the case, which are publishod below, wero filed aud tho oral argu ment of the case opened by Mr, Hall, at- torney for the defense. Tho main question, Mr. Hall held, was upon the construction of the statutes of the stato. Under the law prior to 1587 the publi cation of either a false or a malicious libel constituted a crime, In 1877 the law was amended, making the penalty of libel impris onraent, and further providing that the libel must be both false and malicious. A libel, therefore, he held, is not a crime under the present luw, unless both faise and malicious. Mr. Hall also held that under the present law the burden of tho proof rests with the stave. The state must prove the falsity of the alleged libel. In civil libel the burden of proof rests with tho state, but in @ criminal libel, where falsity becomes ma- terial the burden of the proof rests with the state. lo tho case on trial, Mr. Hall held, the state had made no effort to prove the fal sity of the charges, 0o attempt to show that the article published was not true. He fur- ther claimed that the state had failed to show that Vanderyvoort was connected with the publication of the article in the Republican or that Wilcox was owner of the Republican, Mr, Hall cited soveral authorities in support of his position. In reply County Atforney Mahoney answered Mr. Hall's last clause first, The fact that Wilcox ownea the Republican was shown by the evidence of Fred Nyo and [Frank Johnsou that thoy had sold the paper to him; by Wil- ©ox's signature as proprietor of the Republi- can in the bids for city printing; by an article over Wilcox's signature inthe Re- publican that he had opened the columns of the paper for Vandervoort's attack on Mr. Rosewater; and by Vandervoort's libelous letter in which he thanked Wilcox for the use 0f his paper in fighting Mr. Rosowater. Vandervoort's connection Wwith the case was shown by his admission that he wroto the article: by his sienature to the article; by his announcement that he was one of a com- mittee designated to write tho life and mis. deeds of E, Rosewater. After this reference to the teatimony Mr. Mahoney went after the law on the case. He bad a table loaded with the law reports of the various states, and made coplous quoti- tions from them, showing that in all libel eases the burden of proof is with the de- fenso—the defense must prove the falsity of the charges in every respect. Under the old law, to prove a iibel, either the falsity or tho malice of the charge was sufficient, while under the new law bo must be shown, Still there 18 nothing in this to change the rules of evidence. According to Mr. Hull's theory, Mr. Mahoney reasoned, the truth or falsity'of @ charge would not cat any figure in the case. The author of the libel would only have to plead justification, and, that shown, could not be found guilty of libel, hongh every charge made was absolutely False. This theory, Mr. Mahoney claimed, was proposterous and sheer nonsense, and opposed to the rules of cvidence m every court in the land. He held that the defend- ant in this cuse must show both the truth of the charges and the good tnotive inspiring the charge. He quoted decisions from the supreme courts of a dozen different states sustaining his position. He further held, and cited authorities in proof, that the de fense must prove the truth of every oharge made. If any of them aro Dot proven @ verdict of acquittal canunot be returned, and the court can ouly take cognizance of the charges that are proven when judgment is passed. The justification, he said, must be as broad as the charges. This theory had never been at- tacked by Mr. Hall. Mr, Mahoney's argu ment lasted more than an_ hour, and was a very complete showing of the ' law in the case. Mr. Hall replied briefly and the case was taken under advisement by the court. THE BRIKFS, . Vandervoart's Detense and County Attorneys Agraement. The following, iu favor of the defendant, 1n the case of the state vs Vandervoort was submitted by the latter's counsel: ‘The couunsel for the defense desires to call the attention of the court 1o the fact that there 1s a total failure on the part of the state to prove the following vital 1acts neces- sary to this case: L. Either that Vandervoort published the livel complained of, 2. Or that the same was false. ‘There is no question but that a public: 18 absolutely necessary to a conviction, This 18 & self-evident proposition, and we submit that, upon a careful examination of the tes- timony, this court will see that thers is an absolite failure to conuect the defendant with the publication, The only evidence at all, even that Vandervoort wrote the article, is the statement of Richardson that he (Van- dervoort) wrote it. 'The charge here is pub-~ lisbing in a newspuper 2, The crime of libel in the state of Ne- Baaska is statutory. Under the old” law one who publishes a false or malicious libel was liable criminally. (Laws 1887, page —.) The constitution provides, however, that the truth, when published for good motives and for justifiable ends, was a defens: Under the old law, then even the truth w: no detenso unless published for good mo- tives aud justifiable ends. But in 1880 (general statutes, page 1006) tho law was ameoded. The penalty was made much more severe, being now impris- onment in the peniteatiary. Buat in making the punishment greater, an amendment wus made in tho statutory crime, It wasamended any one publishing a false and ma. licious libel was punishable. The libel must ow be not only malicious, but false, to make & crime, In this case, there was no attempt at all by the prosecution to show that the alleged libol wus false, They relied on the old rule under statutes similar to the old law, under which the burden of proving the truth of the prosecution, and that it was published for good purposes and justifiable ends, was upon the accused. That'is under statutes where, even though the libel was true, if it was not published for good motives and justifiable ends, or, in ottier words, if it was malicious, it constituted a crime, But under the laws of 1530 the state must show the publication to be false. the ion 1 (& Archibald), Cri Pr. p. LT (copy) i, (5 Ssish. Rp. 1. Commouwealth v Turne (8 Bure, 1) Indictment must follow thd statutes “'If uny person shull willfully kill, disfigure, ete.” * An indictment reading that the defendunt did unlawfuily steot, ete., is bad. There are also a number of decisious in eivil cases throwing the burden on the de- feadunt of proving the truth of the libel, because whe® presumption is in a civil case that all men aro chuste, honest, roputable untii the contrary 1s shown; all men are presumed to lead good lives, Butin a crim inal suit lhx presumption is that the one charged is infocent. Aud this presumption of A*wwm will prevail even against the presumpiion of chastity. West 'vs state, 1 Wisconsin, 200, On a prosecution for seduction state must prove he previous chaste character of the fewale, « And whileina eriminal case the presump- tion that Rosewater was @ cLasto and hon- est mun would prevail, it would not prevail iu a eriminal case as agaivst the presumption of_innocence of the aefendant. It devolyed absolutely then upon the state to prove the erime charged;to prove that Vandervoort published a libel; to prove that it was walicious; to prove hat it was false. Were this ot true & man might be seut o tLe penitentiary uader the severe punish- went made by the uew law without any proof tuut the libel was false at all, without the stute showing & criwe, by presuming s man guilty, who according to law must be presumed innocent. This will not be done: the state must prove every material fact of the charge. Mr. Mahoney's ftion. County Attorney Mahoney has filed the following vrief with the police courtin the libel case of the state against Paul Vander- voort: Counsel for defendant in their brief raise two questions for the consideration of this court; the firat is a question of fact and the second one of law. The first is, the state has not sufficiently proved the publication of libel by the de- fendant, Vandervoort Our statute providing for a preliminary examination 18 to the effect that ir, upon such examination, the magistrate shall find that the crime chargea has been committed and that thera is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed said crime, he shall bind him over to answer said charge in the district court. In this case there can be no doubt that the erime charged was committed, that is, that the libel was published, in the words and at the time charged in the com- plaint, The testimony shows further that the defendant, Vandervoort, wrote the libelous public his admission to that effect is abundant testimony to show his con- nection with it (Wharton's American Crim- and 2360.) In the lust scction above referred to the author uses this language: *‘The admission of the defendant himself of the fact of bis concern is abundant.” The articlo having been admitted to have been written by Van- dervoort, everything contained in the articlo is made his personal declaration. Therefore, the declaration contained in the artigle show- ing that 1t was written for the purpose of being published, is proof of the fact that it was $0 written. It 18, therefore, proved positively 1, That the libel wua published, 2. That the defendant, Vandervoort, wroto it, 8, That it was wratten for the purpose of lication, and that it was his intention in ting it that it should be published m the aha Republican, hese facts being proved, the court cannot find otherwise than thut there is reasonablo ground to bolieve that the defendant, Van~ dervoort, caused the publicatiou of the libel. “The second points urired by defendants is that the change in the wording of our statute made 1 1837, from fulse or malicious to false and malicious, changes the burdon of proof and makes it incumbent on the state 10 show that the publication was false. No such conclusion can be reached from an ex- amination of the statuto itself. The only benefit that the defendant could claim from this change of the statute would be that if the publication were not both faise and malicious he could not be found guilty, while under the former law he coald be found guilty if the publica- tion were either false or malicious. But, granting that the change n the wording o the statute has this effect, there is nothing to indicate & change from the former rule as to whether the question of the truinor falsity of the publication must be provea by tho state or by the defenaaut. b ‘Tho constitution, shich provides that, in all trials for libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, when pubiished with good mo= tives and for justiliable ends. shall be a suf. ficient defense, clearly contemplated thatv the matter of truth was a defense, that is an aMrmative defense, and the rule is well set- tled that all matters of aflirmative defense must be proved by defendant. This being the rule ostablished by the constitution, no act of the legislature could change it. DBut, aside from this provision of the constitution’ the law is well settled everywhere that in all civil or criminal prosecutions for libel, the burden of establishing the truth of the publication is upon the defendant. This is the rule laid down by Maxuwell in his work on “‘Criminal Procedure,” 2, and he even goes 8o far as to sa) criminal cases, that 1s, in criminal prose tion for libel, if the article complained of a libelous charged a criminal offense, the d fendant to make out his defence, must prove tho truth of his charge beyond a reasonable doubt.” Judge Cooley, n his work on_“Constitu- tional Limitations” at page 574, after review g differeut constitutional provisions, say: “It must be held, I think, that where the d fendant justities in & criminal prosecution, the burden is upon him t prove not only the truth of the charge butalso the good motives and justifiablo ends of the publication.” Council for defendant refers to second *‘Archbold’s Criminal Procedure.” payge 1,047. Now, the lauguage there found is as ““That defendant knew it to be ‘T'his may be proved from the admis fals sions of overt acts of the defendant or by proof of any other facts from which the judge may infer it. The prosecutor should first prove that the matter is false in fact: or, the jury may presume it from the defendaut not having specially proved the truth of the libel in his justification.” This language clearly implies that if the defence fails to justify the falsity of the pub- lication, if it charges a crime, i8t0 be pre sumed. . ‘U'ho samo author at page 1,053 uses this language: *In support of the blea stating the truth of the hbeloas matter The de- fendant must prove the truth of all the pas- sages which are libelous. If he do not and matter ne fails to prove be libelous, he must be convicted and his proof of part can only be taken into consideration by the court in passing judgment; but if the only part he fails to prove huppens uot to bo libelous, his justification of that part may be rejected as super plusage, and he will be entitled to judgment on that.” In Commonwealth vs Batchelder, Thateh. Ci. Cas. 101 reported in 4 Crim, Def. 611, the indictment was ihat the aefenaant composed and pub- lished a certain false, scandalous and de- famatory article, the court hell on the doctrine that the burden is on the defendant to prove strictly the truth of the libelous matter and the auestion of his motves and the justifiableness of his ends. In the State vs Verry (Kan.) 13 Pa, Rep, 833, tne indictment charged the pub- lication to be false aud malicious, the court held that the burden was upon the defendant 10 prove that it was true. In Wharton's American Criminal Law, sec. 501, the rule is laid down thut the defendant to justify must make his justification us broad as the charge, it will not do to justify as to a part ouly. In Commonwealth vs Bouner, 9 Met. 410, the indictment charged that the publication was false and malicious, The supreme court, by C. J. Shaw, however, under this indictment held that the burden was on the defendaut to prove the truth of the matter charged as livelous. “Tue same rule is laid down n the supreme ocourt of Mass. in 15 Pick. 837, and again on 15 1ick. 381, In Tox. an act has been passed which pro- vides for punishing criminally oral siander~ where the words spoken talsely and ma- liciously or lnlwl{ and wantonly charge a female with unchastity, Under this law, which clearly requires the indictment should allege the falsenood of the charge and ulso to allege either malicious or wantonness the court in Patterson vs Tho State, 12 Tex. App. 453, 4 Crim, Def, 501 decided that the burden is upon the defendant to prove the truth of the statements made by nim. In other words, that the stute having proved the use of the languuge set out in the indict. ment, he must than prove the truth of such language or stand convictad, In Maxwell's riminal Procedure,” at page 817, tne doctrine is laid dowh that the ndictwent wust cbarge that the publication was false, scandalous and malicious, This was written, too, before the change in the law of 1557, and yet it was on such au indict- ment, a3 we have seen, the same auttor at page 513 holds that the 'burden of showing the truth of the publication is upon the de- fendant. It is a general projosition of Crim, law, that all descriptive matter in an indictment must bo proved as laid, In other woras if alibel is charged in un indictment where the statute so require it as fulse, the proof must be that itis false, but how is this proof made! 1t is made as the authors ugyiversully hold, by the presumption that a publication charging the commission of & orime 's false, just as it 1s necessary Lo prove under our law that the publication was muli- cious and the presumption of law furnishes the proof as to the malice. In all the precedents set out in Wharton's “Criminal Procedure” of indictments, the libel is wvariably desiguated us false and malicious, and yet all of the authors hold that the only proof of the falsity required is thut suppiied by the legal presumption, and that the burdea of proving the truth ot the publication is upon the defendant. Counsel for defendant have cited West vs. stato, First Wisconsin, 200 in support of their theory thatthe presumption of inno- cence in the defendant Lo overcome the pres sumption of chustity of he prosecutrix. Evel if that rule were true as announced in the caseof West vs the state, it would have no application here. That was & prosecution for seduclion, snd was " in necessarily governed by to that particular crime. But I contend that the rule s stated in West va tue state is not supported by the authorities. The state Wells, 48 lowa, 671, a much more recent case, supported as it is by Anare va. the atate, 5 Towa, 850, and state va. Shean, 32 Towa, 83, says that in a prosecution for se- duction the previous chaste character of the prosecutrix is presumed and the burden of overcoming this presumption is upon the de- fendant. The other citation made by defendant, commonwealth vs, Turner, 9th Bush., Ken tucky, 1, can have no possible application to this case, It simply holds that, under a statute which reads if any person shall wil- folly kiil, disfigure or maim any horse, etc., an indictment reading that the defendant did uniawfuily shoot, kill. ete., is bad. With the authorities all holding that the burden of proof to show the truth of the publication 1s upon the defendant, and not a single adjudication being found by defend- ants counsel, after spending a week in the preparation of his brief, the defendant hav- ing failed to justify his”publication, should be bound over. the rules relating Revly by the Defense. 1 filed the following brief in reply yestorday : The counsel for the state in replying to the brief of defendant have falleu into sev- eral material errors of fact on the ficst point named in the brief of defendant. “There is not & word in the testimony to show that Vandervoort published the a; uor 18 there a word to show that it was Vai dervoort's intontion to publish it in the Re- publican, ‘That Vandervoort wrote an article ana that an article was published are shown, but that it was the same article, or that Vander- voort published it there is not a word to sub- stantiate. It ia idle to say in view of this state of facts, that all that is necessary is to show probable cause. ‘Lbat is very true, but the probable cause 18 to bo shown by facts not by suspicions. It is to be shown by proot Here the charge 18 that of publication, and there is not a word to snow that Vandervoort wrote the article published, or that he was in any way connected with its publication. 2. Counsel for the state practicaily admit away their case in answer w defendant’s brief on this point, The constitutional pro- vision is simply & limit upon the law muking powor. Under its provision that state could pass no law in which the troth, published with good motives, should not be a defense. But libel is still a statutory crime, ana our legislature has said, by the acts of 1887, that the libel must not ouly be;nalicious but false to ba eriminal. The rule quoted by counsel from Maxwell, page 318, 1s the rule wherao the libel is shown to be malicious under the oid law. Under the old law the crime was proved when a malicious libel was shown: 1t made a differ. enco essentially whether true or false. The erime, having been shown, the presumption of falsity follows, not as an essential to the crime, because that is alreudy shown when the malicious libal was proved, but because the libeler is, prime facie, the crine having peen proved, a tort feaser, und he must show his justification 1f he have any. Smith's lead- cases (Sed., vol. 2, part 2 page %02), The case quoted from § Metcalf, 410, is ai rectly in point with our argument. ‘I'he court say, “'If the publication pe libelous, that _is, such s to bring the person libeled mto hatred, etc., malice is presnmed from | the injurions act.’ And when the libel is malicious the defendant is put on his de- fense to show the truth of the matter pub- lished, and that it was published with good motives to rebut the presumption of malice. Because under the old rule if the libel walicivus the crime was proved. The quoted in 15 Pickering is the same. We see the council for the state cite 43 Towa. This ¢ 18 not in point. ‘The evi- dence in that case showed previous chastity, and the authority 18 a mere dictum. In 35 and 5 lowa this point was not raised, passed upon or decided. Noris the Texas case in point. It is indirectly quoted by council. The penal code does not read fatsely and maliciously, but falsely or maliciousi, And article 646 of fthat code expressly pro- vides, that the state shall not show the falsi- ty, but the defendant the truth, so that the statutory crime then us stated by the court is simply to impute & want of chusuty 10 a womau. nsel for the state cannot find a case in which the falsity of a libel is presumed where tho libel must be false and malic 1o be a crime. ‘The falsity here is materisl, the proof is wholly lacking und the case should ~be - dis missed. i) WAS VANDEKVOORT LIBELED? Arguments in thy Case of the State Against Mr. Kosewater. The arguments in the case against Mr. E. Rosewater, charged with having orimioally libeled Paul Vandervoort, were heard by Judge Helsley in police court yesterday after- noon, The court room was crowded and deep interest manifested in the presentation of the arguments by the attorneys. Assist- ant County Attorney Moriarity ussumed the burden of tho case for the state and talked an bourand & bulf. Thattruth, he said, shall be a sufficient defense, if published with good motives, is admitted, but you can’'t say that belief in truth or sincere opinion of truth forms a justi- fication of a libelous charge. No other construction but what is shown on the face of the words used is allowed, any other con- struction would do a plain violence to the constitution, He cited the Kunsas libel law, which aliows the truth of a charge to be ad- mitted in evidence, and compared it with the Nebraska coustitution, which provides that :h o truth may constitute a defense. ‘I'nis difference was cited to correct an error made by the state at au earlier stage of the pro. ceedings in admitting that the Kansas and Nebraska libel laws were the same. As to the questions of fact, Mr, Moriarity attempted to show that Mr. Rose: water had not succeeded in establish ing a Justification, He claim Vandervoort had nothing to do with wciting the assault made by Curry upon Mr, Rose- water, and held that the “fact that sn indict- ment was not returned against him at the time was abundant proof of this clai He attacked Mr. Porter's evidence on this poiny as not being defiuite and further that Van- dervoort himself had aenied the statements made by Porter. In reviewing the testimony of sir, Baldwin and Mv, Porter, Mr. Mori- urity dwelt at length upon the fact that both of tuese gentlemen, while they knew that an assault was to be made upon Mr. Rosewater, understood that it was to be & mere buffeting and beating and not & murderous assault. He denied Mr, Dahlstrom's testimony by presenting Vandervoort's denial of it. On Vandervoort's lobby record Mr. Mori- arity deniod that Vaondervoort was habitu- ally given to taking members of the legis- Iature into the “oil rooms” at Lincoln. He denied that thero was any evidence showing that Vandervoort had used his influence to secure the votes of legislutors, and, further, that e was not a frequenter of houses of ill- repute. Hoe admitted thut Vandervoort was a lobbyist, but one whose conduct was ex- ceptionally upright and circumspect. There was uo warrant, he said, for couphng Van deryoort's name with tho threatened assault of Caldwell upon Mr. Rosewater. Tho truth of tue charges, Mr. Morwrity held, had not been estublished, nor had good motives for the publication of the charges been shown. It could not havn been patriotism, love of peace, love of truth, or religious fer vor. There appears, he claimed, no good motive for thescurrilous publication. Again, the article was published without any worthy end in view. Tho purpose was not 0 provent Vandervoort's clevation to an olective ofice; it was not to prevent his re- ceiviog au appointive office; it was not o re- wmove hiw, for no charges were against bhim for wisconduct 1n office; it was uot for the purpose of preventing him from corrupting the council on the Dod - lin granite, for thero is o evidence of any irregularity on bis part in ,connection with the award of the ocontract, The proofs, he said, show that tue defendant had no just reason for the charges made and he should be held to answer for his newspaper assault. He defended Vandervoort's career s @ mo- nopoly lobbyist by picturing the advantages that arise from corporations. Corporations have given us the rajirouds, the telephone, the thousands of ships on the watery world, and even Tug Bee, which is a great aud prosperous corporation. The freedom of the press is a great power for good when properly regulated, one of the glgantic piliars upholding the superstructure of our form of government, but the great, tne upright and fiood have always abhorred the reprobate snd the liceutious press, The stato does not complain of the freedom of the press, but of 1ts licentiousness. Mr. Rose- water 15 @ great journalist and & political au. tocrat, but we should remember that the law is no respector of persons: all classes of men must bear its burdens and all are sub- ject to its penalties And all classes should bow to its behests. No individual is too humble to bs below the law, and no man is %0 groat as to tower above it. As the mountain towers abo¥e tho ndble hill, 80 the law towers above tha mere individual. The fact that Mr. Rosowater is a newspaper man and hes a great influence is more reason that he should be held to account for the use he makes of his advantagoes, For the defense Mr. Gannon made a bril liant addross, claiming justification of the charges mado in THA' Hee, Mr. Gannon's address will be publisted in full in a later issue. —lpe A elass factory in the state of New Jorsey is said to be eneaged in little elso but the manufacture of bottles for Dr, Bull's Cough Syrup. Price 25 cts 1 have veen suffering the past three months with rheumatism, One bottle ot Salvation Oil gave entite relief. Fuaxk O'BRIAN, Baltimore, Md. AN EXCITING GAME OF POLO, The Ramblers Prove too B Councll Blufrs, ‘The Ramblers and the Council Bluffs polo teams occupied the boards at the Coliseum rink last night, the amblors winning by a score of 6 10 4 after & hot and stubborn con~ test. By their admirable work in the outset it looked as if the Ramtlers would have a walk over, but after scoring four straight goals in the first mnings they let up u hittle and allowed their red shirted opponents from acrossfthe Big Muddy, just before the ex. piration of the innings, to score their first point. The first goal in the second innings was also taken by the Blu tho second by the Ramblers and the third by the Towans, The next point was in_favor the Rumblers, and then the Bluffs followed with a couple more and the game was over, The audience was quite large and cheered the many bril- liant plays of McGuire, Stoney and Rhodes enthusiastically. The score: Ramblers, o 0 Council Blu . 4 Following is the standing of the teams in the race up to and incluaing last night's game: Many for Played. Won. Lost. Wheel club 4 1 Council Blu 4 2 Kambler: 4 2 Morses.. . 2 3 Continentais, B 1 4 Friday night the Wheel club and Morses meet, and on Saturday night the Lincolu team will bo here for thew first game with Owaha for the championship of the state. The two teams will b as follows: Omaha, Rhodes, McGuire, Kennedy, Mathews and Jean. Lincoln, E. and F. Mockett, Eldridge, Lottridge and Grififth. ' Frank Dingle, tho Minneapolis chami byker, arrived last night to go into training for the great six-day whoe. chase that be- gins at the Coliseum on the night of Febru- ary 10. ion Boited Down Grippe tn a N shell From the New Haven News: Don't negloct a cold. That is, perhaps, the best advice thatean be given on an proach of the bothersome influenza. Lo its symptoms, at least, the influenza is an aggravated cold, and the only danger attached to it is that by its kening effect on th tem it m invite other and morve d dies. So, in the firsty ing cold, but if you do ¢ one, then stay ut home and take care of it. Mean- time, don’t worry about it. The above brief item covers the whole ground. We wish, however, to empha- size the words, “'stay at home and take care of yourself,” and add, until “en- tirely woll of your cold,” and if Cham- berlain’s Cough Remedy 1s taken as di- rected, vou will not/find it necessary to remain at home but a few du Re- member that the most- dungerous time is just wnen vou ave recovering orabout ovar the attack, and tbat is the time to be careful, or, in other words, to stay at home and take care of yourself. It is especinlly necessary that the bowels be kept regular. trossing mala- avoid cateh- The Diko'a KHelief Committee. A meeting of the committees appointed by tho board of trade and _real cstate exchange 10 solicit awd for the drouth-stricken farm- ers of North Dakota has been called for next turday at 12 o'clock at the rooms of the real ostate exchange. Governor Mellette has notified the committee thut the only ar- ticles necded are s:eus and grain, but re- cent reporis in tho daily papers would indi- cate that food, clothing and provisions are also necessary. The committees consist of the following gentlemen : Board of T'rade—Colonel C. S. Chase, chairman; W. A. L. Gibbon, A. R. Du- frene, Thomas H. Taylor, H. T. Clarki Fred W. Geay. W. L. Parrotte, Johu Brady H. H, Meday, B. H. Cudahy, D. C. Fostor. Real Estate Exchinge—John W. Paul, chairman; I, C. Bruner, F. K. Darling, E. L. Perrine, Colonel S. 8, Curtis, Natban Merriam, John S. Boyd, George W. Ames, . 8. Berlin, Joseph iBarker. es’ Nerve'and Liver Pills An important discovery. They act on the siver, stomach and bowels through the nerves. A nev principie. They speedily cure billiousness, bad taste, torpid liver, piles and constipation, women and childr surest. 80 doses for at luhn & Co.'s, Spiendid for men, st, mildest, . Samplesfres 15th und Douglas. Buy Some Furniture, The board of fire and police commissioners since moving into the new quarters, room 212, New York Life building, have failed to pro- vide any accommodations whatever for rep. resentatives of the press. ‘The latter are not even given a chair, much less a tuble, and, as a rosult, are pat behind in their work from one and a half w two and a half hours at every session of the board, notwithstanding repeatod requests for somo 8ort of Accomo- dations during the month or so that the board has been in 118 new location. Pears’ is the best and purest soapever made, i L The Great Rock lsland Route. In changing time on Sunday, Nov. 17, the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. have considered every point of in- terest to the Omaha traveling public. 1f you are going to Des Moines, Chicago or any woint east, our solid vestibule limited train is just’ what you want. Leave Omaha at 4.25p. m. arrive in Des Moines 9:30 p. m, and'Chicago 8:30 a, m., dimng car for supper:leaving Council Bluffs and for breakfast before reaching Chicago. This trainiis also equipped with the finest sleepers and chair cars made by tne Pullman Co., which leave from the U. P. depoty,®@maha,every day at 4:25 p, m., making elose connections at Chicago with all-trains for eastorn points, In addition to this magunificent traio we have two other daily trains to Chicago, leaving Omaha at 5 a. m, and 5:15 p. m. For information as to routes, rates, time, etc., call at ticket office, 1305 Farnam, street; telephone 782 8. 8. STEVENS, Generdl, Western Agent. — The Only One. The Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway is the only line running solid vestibuled, electric lighted and steam heated trains between Chicago, Coun- cil Bluffs and Omaha, The berth reading lamp feature n the Pullman sleeping cars run on these lines if patented and cannot be used by any other railway company, It is the great improvement of the age. Try it und be convinced. Sleeping cars leave the Union Pacific depot, Omaha, at6 p. m. daily, arriving at Chicago at 9:30 a. m, Passengers taking this train are not compelled to get out of the cars at Council Bluffs and wait for the train to be cleaned., Get tickets and sleeping car berths at Union ticket office, 1501 Farnam st. F. A. NasH, Gen. Agt. J. E. PrRESTON, Pass. Agt. JANUARY 20, 1800 “(OL" RUSSELL'S TREACHERY Plodged to Van Wyck, He Lod a Compact to Knife Him. A WILY TWO-FACED RENEGADE, Interviews With Ex-Speaker Harlan and Ex-Sinator Keokley on Iussell's Desploble Liog islative Career. Unwritten History. Yorg, Neb, Jan. 2%—|Special to Tne Bee.)—A representative of Tne Bee called upon Hon. N, V. Harlan and Senator C. V Kickloy today and obtained a few significant facts concorning the statements made in Russell's testimony in tha Vaudervoort- Rosenwater livel case In answer to a question as had read Russell's testi Tur Bex Mr. Harlan said *“Yes, I have read it. The whole matter of the appoinyment of this investigating committee was thoroughly ventilated at the time and interviews published in which I stated then ns now, that Mr. Rosewater or no other man had anything to do with the makeup of the committee, At the time the charges were preferred, Mr, Rosewater ro quested me to appoint’ a fair committee us did also Mr. Russell, and this 1_tried to o, as I wanted the matter thoroughly sifted, believing that somethiug was crooked. 1 Qid not appoint enemics to Mr. Rosowater, s thac would have beeu o mere farce, neither aid I appoint those whom [ regarded as special friends of tho accused, or the uc- cusor, but my 1utention was o select men who would investigate the charges, hear all the evidence, and make findings and reports without either felir or favor ot the interested parties. A8 this conimitteo 1 appointed J. A. Dempster, J. C. Gilmore, W. S, Craig, R. M. Aiken, H, C. Minnix, C. Sths and G, K. to whethor he published in rony Koipor, + These meu were in no wiso Rosewater’s “lackeys," us their reports and actions - dicate. They were all good, independent, substantial members of th but, politicians nor party strik I wish furtner to say regarding Russell statement of my presenting the charges, Russell does not present the mutter as it occurred. Anyone, by examining the house journal of 1557, page 1,153, will soe that the charges came in the form of a communica- tion addressed to myself as the presiding officer, and that the same was handed tho clerk 'as any othor communication and was read in the regular order of business, and in that way it was brought before the house for action as was thought proper.” “Well, how about your fear of Ruse- water?" “That scems a silly question for mo to auswer. 1 bhad no fear whatever of Rosewater, snd upon a number of times my nctions and_vote were ewainst his plans and desires. However, he always treated e friendly and courteously and 1 nouse, not had no reason whatever to fear him, nor Tie Bee.? “\What was the fecling of the house at this time toward Mr. Rosewater and Tus Beet” 1t was good. All the anti-monopoly mer Dbers of both house and senate were friendly to Tie Bee because of its position on the railroad and other questions.” - -senator Keckley Ialks. Ex-Senator Keckley entertains very pos- itive views regarding and Russeil himself. opinion be said: “I bave this to say about Russell: His appotment as chairman of tne judiciary committee was against my judgment, and I 80 expressed n f to Mr. Harlan, 1 know of his having frequently visited other speak- ership headquarters than Mr. Harlan's, whom he pretended to be supporticg, and [ believed he was trying to gain information as 0 the strength of the various candidates, so as to be with'the winning man, without re- gard to the principles involved. My convie- Tions us to his insincerity and treachery were confirmed by the following circumstauce, which occurred several days after the legis- lature had been organized, pending the sena- torial contest: Ih response to an invitation by General Van Wyck L uttecded o meeting of his supporters in'his rooms one evening. He presented a paper for me to sign pleag- ing myself to vots for him first, last and all the tin “Inis paper 1 refused to sign, [ told Van Wyck that [ had come down there wstructed to vote for him and intended to o 80, but could see no necessity for signing an ironclad paper. I told him that my obli- gations to my constituents I regarded as more binding than any paper. This action of mine of course soon became geaerally known. Inaday orso Slater requested me 10 attend a myeting to be held immeaiately after adjoarnment in the judiciary room. ‘'he object of it he refused then to divulge, merely statiag that he very much desired my attendance, and I uccordiugly went. When in the room I found Russell, ‘later and about seven or eizht other members present. Russell seomed to be the moving spirit of the meeting. He arose aud stated that the object of the moeting was for the purpose of conferring and deciding upon a course regarding the senatorial contest; that he understood that those present were the “hetweens’’ ana unpledged to any candidate, and that it lay within their power to name the senator, whereupon [ in- formed them that 1 was pledeed 1o Van Wyck and excused myself and with~ This was the begining of the treach- ery to Van Wyek,"” “i3ur, senator, how about the statement in Russell’s testimony that Harlan and about twenty-five others were afraid of Rosewater, and that Mr. Harlan’s appointments were all wade in fear of IRosewater and in his inter. Russell's testimony When asked his ievo that Mr. Hurlan was in- fluenced by fear of Mr. Rosewater, but. 1 do believe there wero mavy members of thnt fegislature who feaved the criticisms of THE e by re son of their continually violating pledges made prior to their election, and I think Russell was one of them. I know that on many occasions Mr. Harlan voted against Mr, Rosewater's mdvico and desires and without fear of being maligned by Tue ) “Well, you were ot afraid of THE BEE, were youl” ¥ “I certainly was not, and do not think that any honest member neéed have been. | have ucted many times contrary to Mr. Rose- water's desiros, but have never been slan- dered for it.” A Entirely Recovered from the Grip. Mr. George Tennant of this city, in conversation with a representative of the Mail and Times, one evening this weel, said: “Yes, I took this orevail- ing mfluenza. L gavo up work and went to bed., I had a dreadful cough and was very sickz, but I am all right now.” Wae ventured to ask what rem- ody had proven successful in his case. 0, Chamberlain’s Cough Remedy. I used a whole bottl it brought me - out all right; feel first~ rate now, We are never without Chamberlain’smedicines in our family. My father is now at Steila- coom, Washington, and took a supply of these remedies with him. Yes, G Chamberlain’s medic are first class,” This testimony is only one of many that might be gjven to show the value of these preparations, Those Who ave afilicted with this malady would do well to use Chamberlain’s Cough Remedy. If used as divected it will be found effectaul,—Des Moines Mail and Times. e Dr. Birney, practice limited to ca- tarrhal diseases of nose and throat. Rooms 248 to 250, Bee building. Dr. JOHN C. JONES, DISEASES OF WOMEN. Oftice, 8. K.Cor. Iith and Douglas Bis., Owabs Neb DEAF % e T LT SN IR SR XS YRIGHT iasg THE HEAVY E sup of coffee, * I've made a discovery. “well, Cy what is it?" “I've found that the heavy end o D OF A MATCH. “ Mary,” sald Farmer Flint, at the breakfast-table, as he asked for a sécond rus, you're about the last one I'd suspect of such a thing; but f a match is its light end,” responded Cyrus, with & grin that would have adorned a skull. Mary looked disgusted, but with an air of trinmph_quickly retorted, “ I'va got a discovery, too, Cyrus, Golden Medical Discovery.! It di o8 blood, tones up the system, and makes one feel brand-new. It was made by Dr, R, V. Pier , and is called away blotches and pimples, purifies the Why, it cured Cousin Ben, who had” consumption, and was almost reduced to a skeleton. Before his wife began to use it, she was a pale, sickly thing, but look at hei rosy-cheeked and healthy, and 'weighs on Cyrus, is a discovery that's worth mentioning.” 's wife was right, for the ““Golden Medieal Discovery " is in fact The farme the only medicine l‘oerflf_viug the bl blotches, cruptions, and other Skin an Swellings, and kindred ailments, posse as to warrant its manufacturers in selli glsts, under a positive guarantee that case, or money paid for it will be refunded. and Lung d ases. Even Consumption (which is Lung-scrofula ) she's That, ¢ hundred and sixty-five pounds. ood and curing all manner of pimples, d Scalp diseases, Scrofulous Sores and d of such positive curative properties ng it, as they are dolng, through drug- it will either benefit or cure In every It also cures Bronchial, Throat lelds to its marvelous curative properties, if taken in time and given a fair trial, For Weak Lungs, Spitting of Blood, Shortness of Breath, Bronchitis, Asthma, Severe C"“fi:"s' and kindred affections, it is an eflicient remedy. Don't be fooled the dealer may make a larger profit. ery.” It con vegetable extract. adults or children, Main Street, Buffulo, N. Y. nto taking something el said to be “just as good.” that There’s nothing at all like the * Discov- s 1o alcohol to inebriate ; no syrup or s tion ; as peculiar in its curative effects as in its composition, Dose small aud pleasant to the taste. WORLD'S DISPENSARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, No. 063 ar to derange diges- 1t’s a concentrated Equally good for CATARR SOLID GOLD FINEST LD from %6 to §10. BEST STEEL S¢ECTAC tenses, 75¢, %1 and $1.50; SCOTCH PEBBLE rth 8 All Eyc Glasses at same r optici and a pe visual imperfections corree BE! w JEWELERS AND OPTICIANS. - :DOUGLAS: AND: : AS5TH 8T8/ manently cured by DR. SAGE'S OATARRH REMEDY. Special Closing Out Sale! Fine Spectacles, Eye Glasses, Thermomatars, and All Ofher Optical Goods at Greatly Reduced Prices. ¢t fit guaranteed in every filled at lowest possible prices. 1,000 THERMOMETERS highest grade. re days to buy SJEWELRY, DEAMONDS: and SILVERWARE at your own price. MAX MEYER & BRO,, IN THE HEAD no wmatter of how long etanding, is pere 50 cents, by druggists. , 81 and $5; vold everywhere , with purest white crystal worth donbl URAC y $2.50; eduction, Eyces tested by our ase. All tU's ‘prescriptio ted, Ocu 1r Scen ip to the very - COR. 16TH AND FARNAM S18. D* JRGOBS Medical & Surgical Dispensary, Nos. 101 to 113 So. 13th St. 0 Rooms tor Patients, ufer) Drains, i fram Nervou early dacay and perhapa C: : Rhoumatism, Poisonous Dischar, gured. llustrated LUt Ef We make & speciaity of Inhalstion, Kl Yy Epil ‘WOME tions. Bo T A S| Reception Rooms 39 and 40, O artible Draains. nsumpon or s nll(, reat 08K "TATo's Sooret Rerars’ | conta, ol irrors'’ | conta., DEFORMITIES hicesanit trentmont of every form of di Trussos, Clab Feat, Curvatures of Spine, Bay, Kidavy, Biadder, Kar, Skin ousnes Uter), Plies, Ferialo Weakuess, Dyspopss nha, Nob bility, Lost Manhood, Faillug Memory, Exhaustin Fread R bk “Rbite. nad il (e aHocs ekl 1§ acientifically, by now methods, Consultation froe. painful swelllngs quickly roiloved and radio Ty d for Quustion Liston any Chironio Disoasa - Tiost. facilitics, upparatus and remedies for suo.ossful Teqtiring Modical Or SurKioal {reatoients Piles, Tumors, Cancer, Nronchitia nd bio: A and all argloal © jera CIALTY. Book, Clrcalars u_stion lirt on Nerve Snstiuntion: Neuratetn. 1eusorrhia, baia-1a i Skin Pimplen wud all lo)d Disouse: Syphilis, Scrofula, Bad Blood, 8kin, Urinary Diseases ani Gleot Cured for Life WSk PE MASE O ¥ THE ALTO LY Gro.AMACBETH&CO. PiTTspl RoH ) LAME @iMNEeys ST For Sale by M. H. Bliss, Omaha, Nebraska, ate Line. ToGlasgow, Belfast, Dublin and Liverpool FROM NEW YORK EVEKY THURSDAY Cabin passage B to K0, a ding to locution of stas room. Excursion 0 #), Eteerage to wnd from Europe at Lowest Ratas. “‘State of California,” building. AUSTIN BALOWIN & Co,, Gen'l Ageats, % Broadway, New York Joux BLEGEN, Geu't Weatern Axent 14 Rundolph St., Chicago HARKY K. MOOKES, THOS. MCCANNE. Ageuts at Qwabs GOLD MEDAL PARIS EXPOSITION 15%. Nos, 303-404-170-604. THE MOST PERFECT OF PENS, | (JOSEPH CILLOTTS ‘ STEEL PENS A Pocker Mireor Free to Smokers of