Rawlings's Life: The Trial

II.
           Note for the future
               Be kind to me
               Posterity.
               Think tenderly
               Of Marjorie.
               On Zelma C.
               Look stonily.
               All cursed be
               Who sueth me.
--A poem written by Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings during the Cross Creek trial in May 1946.

In order to understand the trial of Zelma Cason versus Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings (legally known as Cason vs. Baskin), there must be an understanding of what libel and privacy rights are. By definition, libel is a malicious publication or a defamatory writing. Cason's attorney Kate Walton, convinced Cason to sue Rawlings for invasion of privacy, because of the following passage in Cross Creek:

Zelma is an ageless spinster resembling an angry and efficient canary. She manages her orange grove and as much of the village and county as needs management or will submit to it. I cannot decide whether she should have been a man or a mother. She combines the more violent characteristics of both and those who ask for or accept her manifold ministrations think nothing of being cursed loudly at the very instant of being tenderly fed, clothes, nursed or guided through their troubles. (56)

Cason was furious when she read what Rawlings had written about her. When they met after the book's publication, Cason told Rawlings, that Rawlings had made a hussy out of her. Within a few months, Cason filed a law suit claiming that Rawlings had violated her "rights of privacy." The lawsuit was a shock to many people. First, Rawlings never thought that her good friend would turn against her. Second, the lawsuit shocked many people, especially other writers, because it was the first time that a writer had been sued by a literary subject for invasion of privacy. It was also a big event in the state of Florida, because the state still had not recognized the existence of such a right.

During the trial, Cason and her lawyer, Miss Kate Walton, decided that their strategy for the trial would be to portray Cason as a private and modest person. Rawlings and her lawyers gathered enough witnesses to testify to the contrary. The trial technically began on January 8, 1943, with the filing of a praecipe (a legal writ commanding a person to do something or to appear and show cause why he or she should not) in Alachua County. Cason's declaration was eleven pages long, divided into four sections. Each section contained a separate claim that demanded relief and damages totaling $100,000.

The first count is six pages long and claims invasion of privacy. In this count, Cason claims that Rawlings exposed facts about her willfully and maliciously. The second count also deals with invasion of privacy and states that Rawlings had written about Cason without Cason's consent. This is the only claim that survived the first Florida Supreme Court appeal. The third claim deals with libel. Cason claims that her "good" name and reputation had been ruined by the publication of Cross Creek. The fourth count alleges that Rawlings had exploited Cason for financial gain. In this case, Cason should be able to share in the profits of the book.

Rawlings had an upbeat reaction to the counts. In a letter to Phil May, her lawyer, she writes: " I think the declaration is one of the funniest documents I have ever read in my life. I laughed out loud all by myself, which I seldom do. The particular grievances and the way they are phrased make me feel that our so-called 'defense' is infinitely simpler than I expected" (Acton 50).

On February 26, 1943, May filed a plea testing Cason's declaration. He tried to get the charges dismissed without a trial. On April 20, Kate Walton and May appeared before Judge John A.H. Murphree. Walton's main argument dealt with the issue of invasion of privacy. She also argued against the dismissal of the case. Finally, on August 9, Judge Murphree handed down his ruling, in which he dismissed Cason's declaration. He did, however, give Cason's fifteen days to file an amendment declaration. Instead of doing this, Walton filed a notice of appeal to the Florida Supreme Court on September 1, 1943.

On November 24, 1944, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment in Rawlings's favor, by a vote of 5 to 2. The Court also said that the case would have to go back to the Alachua County Court for a trial.

During the trial, May's plan was to prove that Cross Creek was of public interest. He did this for two reasons. One, he wanted to show that the book was of great literary value. Secondly, he wanted to prove that Cason had been a public figure, due to her participation in the community. Throughout the trial, May advised Rawlings to settle the case. She refused, because she believed that it would give others the opportunity to sue, if they saw how easily she had given up the fight and, also, because she was fighting for every author's artistic freedom. The trial began on May 20, 1946.

The first day of the trial was spent in selecting the jury. On the side of the defense, Sigsbee Lee Scruggs, was in charge of selecting the jury. He was well known throughout the area as the champion of the underdog and as an effective courtroom lawyer.

The second day, dealt with the swearing-in of the witnesses. Cason had thirteen witnesses; whereas, Rawlings had fifty-five. Zelma herself testified on this day. She protested Rawlings's claim that she used profanity and had a bad temper.

Day three concluded Cason's testimony. From then on, a few of Cason's witnesses gave their testimonies. The defense called on several literary witnesses, including Dr. Alfred J. Hanna, professor of history at Rollins College, Dr. Clifford P. Lyons, professor of English literature at the University of Florida, and Lt. Bertram C. Cooper, who stated that the book gave emotional support to the crew of the U.S.S. Bountiful, in order to support the claim that Cross Creek was important to the literary community.

Day four consisted of more interrogations. On day five, the defense concluded its questioning of the witnesses. Finally, the defense called their star witness, Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings. Her testimony lasted two days long. Fortunately, she won the jury over. When the jury reached their verdict, Cason was not in the courtroom. "We, the jury, find the defendants, Marjorie Kinnan Baskin and Norton Baskin, her husband, not guilty."

In the second appeal, Kate Walton, claimed that there were thirty-nine grounds to reverse the jury's verdict. These grounds ranged from errors in the jury selection to errors in the court's final judgment. On May 23,1947, the Florida Supreme Court handed out its final decision. The court decided that Cason had proven her case concerning invasion of privacy and was entitled to compensation. However, the court claimed that Cason had failed to prove that she was injured in any way by the publication of Cross Creek. Rawlings had to pay Cason a settlement of one dollar, plus the usual court costs of $1,050.10.

-Adyan Graziani

Rawlings's Life: The Trial (A Second Account)

When Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings published Cross Creek in 1942, it became another successful book for the author. Readers enjoyed her vivid, narrative tale of Florida's nature combined with stories of interesting people who called the Creek their home. Although the book was well received, it also became an object of great personal strife for Rawlings. In the same year the book was released, her friend, Zelma Cason, sued her for defamation for what she thought was an inaccurate portrayal of her in Chapter 5: The Census. The news devastated Rawlings and the subsequent trial became a long struggle from which she would never quite recover, creatively or emotionally.

Rawlings made many close friends in her stay at the Creek, Zelma Cason being one of them. Cason was interested in Rawlings's writing and took pride in introducing her to the local scene. Rawlings took to Cason's colorful and exciting personality. Cason was an appealing companion for a budding author. They shared a close friendship and saw each other almost daily, often hunting, fishing, and picnicking together.

In April of 1942, Rawlings visited Cason at the St. Augustine house in which she was boarding. Positive that her newly published Cross Creek would meet with Cason's approval, Rawlings greeted her with a copy inscribed: "For my good friend Zelma Cason, with affection, Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings." But, after reading the book, Cason told Rawlings that she wanted no part of it and felt that Rawlings tried to hurt her on purpose. Rawlings, who was surprised and disturbed, began to cry. "Zelma," she said, "I don't understand; everyone that has spoken to me thinks it is a cute and attractive picture." In response, Cason replied, "I don't, and some of my friends don't . . . You have made a hussy out of me" (Acton 24). Their confrontation lasted for an about an hour in which the two women talked about the issue. In the end, Rawlings felt that she had appeased Cason's anger, and the two women embraced.

But, Rawlings was very wrong. Cason sued her for defamation of character. Rawlings had no intention of hurting her friends and neighbors with her descriptions in Cross Creek. She was understandably upset and worried about losing her friendship with Cason and possibly others who lived at the Creek. But, nobody else was motivated to act against Rawlings. Tom Glisson, Rawlings's neighbor, who was also characterized in Cross Creek, told Cason, "If Marge can come to Cross Creek and make a living writing about the people here, joy go with her." He added, "Friendship is worth more to me than any amount of money" (Acton 22).

Although her friends stood by her, the five-and-a-half-year long trial had many negative effects on Rawlings. She kept her poise throughout the trial, but suffered a nervous reaction after it was over. Two months after the trial, she was still suffering, as she writes in a letter to her lawyer, Philip May: "This morning I thought I was going to be very ill, then suddenly realized that it is just nervous exhaustion brought on, or rather protracted by this lawsuit. It would cure Zelma's ulcers permanently if she knew what she had done to me" (Acton 124).

Rawlings was very distraught that Cason had sued her and was upset that they had lost their friendship. But, on the other hand, Rawlings also felt that this suit was a chance for her to fight for the rights of all authors. She was disappointed in the media coverage during the trial, because it seemed as if nobody was concerned about the rights for which she was fighting. In a letter to Maxwell Perkins in June of 1946, she writes:

There was apparently nothing about the suit in papers outside of Florida, and I am amazed at this, as it would seem to me obvious to all concerned with writing in any form that if I lost the case, no matter could be truly free. I know that I could have bought Zelma off for infinitely less than it has cost me. But, I felt like I should be betraying all writers if I took the easy way out." ( Bigelow 285)

In a letter to her lawyer, Philip May, Rawlings comments on the effects the trial would have on other writers: " . . . what is to happen to all biography and especially autobiography, if a writer can not tell his own life story, as I did in Cross Creek? And one cannot write his own life story without mentioning, short of libel, others whose paths have crossed his own. This is certainly in the realm of unquestionably legitimate writing" (Bigelow 261).

In conclusion, the trial was an experience from which Rawlings would never recover. It was a struggle in which she was left emotionally and physically exhausted. Creatively, the trial was widely blamed for the decline in Rawlings's productivity in the last decade of her life. Sadly, she was unable to produce another novel about her beloved Florida before her untimely death in 1953. It is believed that Cason came to regret her role in the trial, although she never publicly admitted it. She wept upon hearing about Rawlings's death and joined other friends at her funeral. Cason died in 1963 and was buried in the isolated Anitoch Cemetery near Island Grove, among such familiar people as Tom Morrison, Annie Slater, and George Fairbanks. Ironically, fifty feet to the west of the Cason plot is another familiar person-Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings. Ultimately, Cason and Rawlings have achieved in death what they weren't quite able to accomplish in life, that is, peaceful co-existence (Acton 146).

--Shawna Garren

Works Cited

• Acton, Patricia. Invasion of Privacy: The Cross Creek Trial of Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings. Gainesville. University of Florida Press. 1988.
• Cason vs. Baskin. University of Florida. George A. Smather Library, Special Collections.