About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 Argument of Nathaniel C. Moak before the Senate Committee on Privileges and Elections, May 10, 1886 on the Resolution to Inquire as to Article Written by George F. Spinney, for New York Times of April 15, 1886, on Senator Raines 1886

handle is hein.trials/azzt0001 and id is 1 raw text is: ARGUMENT or NATHANIEL C. MOAK, BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS, MAY 10, 1886, ON THE RESOLUTION TO INQUIRE AS TO ARTICLE WRITTEN BY GEORGE F. SPINNEY, FOR NEW YORK TIMES OF APRIL 15, 1886, ON SENATOR RAINES. If the committee please, the parting kick which we received at the last meeting of the committee was given in the fact that the animus of this publication was a libel suit which had been brought by the Raines Brothers, several years ago, against the New York Times. It turns out that Mr. Spinney knew nothing of that, had nothing to do with it and that he did not even know that the learned senator was a member of the firm of Raines Brothers. I might quite as well urge the fact that Raines Brothers had brought a libel suit against the Times expecting that it would be likely to milk liberally, that having failed in exacting the lacteal fluid was the animus of the senator's proceeding against one of its representatives. Of course that libel suit cuts both ways. If the Raines Brothers have a law suit that has not brought forth fruit, naturally lawyers who are somewhat given to getting what they can out of their law suits might have an animus against the paper which had not properly milked' quite as well as the representative of that paper might have an animus against them. And we might quite as well urge that when this investigation was urged against the Times, when a much more libellous article was published in the World, that the animus in selecting the Times representative as the victim was because the Raines Brothers had not made that suit quite as productive as they thought it should have been. One fact was developed, however, in the proof of that fact which I propose to use, for what it is fairly and legitimately worth. It is that the learned senator, whose action is under discussion here, is a lawyer and skilled in the law. He ean plead no ignorance of the law here. He cannot claim he was but a simple layman not familiar with the objects and contents of this bill; and being a lawyer and familiar with the law, if this bill is what I shall attempt to show it to be, a bill which is infamous in its charac-

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most