, 1876-05-13
co,. ,ngersoll Begins the Opening
Argument for the Defense.
eusnicious Evidence and Profess
siona1 Acrimony at
Milwaukee.
Nr,. 1eayenworth's Important Afflda'
yit, as Filed at st. Louis,
CHICAGO.

The efunn trial commenced yesterday morn
.nr Il seemed at one time that there was
decidedly fair prospect for CONTINUANCE, when
~, 1norrsoi] announced his readiness to pro-
crc4, nnder the Joint indictment, and the Gov
ernment insisted on trying the indictment
aga,nst Mum individually. The matter WAS
aT,anoed. however, the Government making the
concession. and agreeing to take up the joint
ind;ctment first. But it was like drawing teeth,
-xcent that it took twice as long to get to it.
The crowd WIS select Que. There was little
Of the ra:g,-tag clement, generally so strongly
rcpresented at criminal trials, present. But it
vas at the same time comparatively small
eptherine, confirming the prevailing impression
that the general interest In the whisky prosccu-
lions has been pretty much satlated.
Cal. Mum was present before 10 o'clock with
bis counsel, COL Ingersoll and Atr. S. E. Dow.
Each looked cheerful and confident The Govern
ment vas on hand in the persons Of District
Attorney Bangs, Mr.. Ben F. Aver, and Mr..
Wfrt Dexter. The first WAS prepared to take
notes, the others to do the remaining a'ork.
They Ill smiled screnely.
ARE YOU READY?
At 1910 Judge Blodgett, having disposed Of
several civil motions, asked the Government
they we're ready to proceed. There wss gen
eral assent, and Deputy Marshal Campbell pro-
ceeded to call the panel Of the jury:
Some little time was spent III calling the jury
4nd arranging the tT1a1 tables, the chief purpose
en the part Of the attorneys seeming to be to
trowd the reporters and provide CONVENIENT seats
Tor themselves At last they had everything to
Iuit themselves, the jury WIS seated i'll the box,
md Nr. aver addressed them on the nature Of
the charge against the defendant, referring to
the indictment against Mum alone.
UNDER WHICH INDICTMENT!
When Ar. aver had concluded, Col. 1ngersou
Eaid this Indictment was not the one he was pre-
pared to meet. This WAS the Indictment against
Mum alone. The Indictment In which he was
prepared was that against Mum and Bridges,
and that was the one be meant to try.
Judge Bangs said he had told Col 1ngersoll
some time ago that probably the Muun-Bridges
Indictment would be taken up first, but that last
Wednesday it was understood that the single
Indictment should be taken up first. At any rate,
h Fas spoken OF as the " Mum indictment"
Col Ingerson said that was too thin He had
been led to believe that the Munn-Bridges iu-
ditment would come up first, aud he had never
eFen read the other.
Mr. Aver said the two indictments charged
ebout the same offeusc, and precisely the same
witnesses would testify to the same facts in the
second case IS III the first They were under
different sections of the statute, and the only
difference was that in one Mr: Munn appeared
Is Supervisor, and in the other in his private
character.
Col Iugerso1l said he was not ready On the
single Indictment. In the case of Mum and
Bridges, they could not use Bridges for Wit
ness He was party to the record, and one Of
the indicted. But in the case against Mum In
diyidually, they could use Bridges as q witness,
and If they we're to be tried this single indict
ment they would want Bridges testimony, and
also that Of Mr.. Hoyt- Il the Government
elected to proceed in this single Indictment, Col
1ngerson said he wanted few moments to ap,
ply for continuance, and be believed he could
satisfy the Court that he should have it.
M1. Aver said 1t was the first time be had
heard OF any misunderstanding between coun-
EEL It was true that Bridges would be
a competent witness on the trial Of the
competent witness. Whether the defendants
had taken sny steps to procure the testimony
ol either Of these witnesses, Or that there was
any probability that they could be prevailed
upon to return to the city, be was not informed.
But he thought the absence Of Hoyt was no
more reason for the continuance Of this case
than it would be for the continuance OF the
other.
The Court-H It is made to appear that
Bridges is materil witness, whom it is in
tended to Produce On the trial Of the single
case, end II the defendant was given to under
stand that the first case tried should b. No. 227,
Where Bridges is jointly indicted with A1unn,
OF course the defendant should have some
f*tF14a*4oA ELL LIE NouIL ulIEuL IUArAttC4
there was cause for either continuing
toe casc, or requiring the prosecution to pro-
ceed with the first case the calendar. sup
Poss We may as well hAvc no conundrums or
Riddles about this thing. II there had been no
evidence Of an understanding, or statement BY
tle counsel Us to which one Of these cases
should be tried first, would say the Govern
neat had right to call either Of them. think
!ou had better proceed with the hrst case. II
Iey both involve the same facts; Il the ouly
$C fhot rf1d ViN
Iac Law while the defendant was an officer and
NE other while in bis individual capacity, while
1e nssi charge Is, Of course, rather more grave,
III WILL be for the prosecution to say whether
oey VI Try the first case first. 1t may involve
Col lngersoll-I would rather have the case
= an here for disposed OF in some way, and L
9aaefstand that Mr.. Aver, from his remarks,
uolos that case up before lis in terrorcm, and
eays they are ready to try both have no OBJ
lection to their entering mol. pros. in the first
ease they want to,
NJ. Ayer-All my arrangements have been
1aaae IN reference to the case we desired to Try
Judge Blodgett-The Court assumes that the
ols1fctc Attorney understands both cases.
~: Ayer-1 don't understand the Court to
t..a' as*aae that any ground has been shown for
on11nuance Of this case Under those circum-
~ s,aaees We prefer to go on with trial OF the
!hls change just decided upon does not make
.. .snange IN the statement Of the case neces-
.st}}: ~ = Inns is joint Indictment against Mum
md .1s Bridges, charging them jointly with con
tRiaus tRnans With large number OF persons, dis
safss ssaers and others, in the City Of Chicago, TO
aellaud the United States OF the tar imposed
apon large quantity Of spirits to be manu-
sG;ltufed at certain disti11eres named in the in
s1letment, and the indictment then proceeds to
.aaIee certain acts committed By some Of the
Psstles to the conspiracy to carry cut its OBJ
!sci @ ~. Bridges has not put in his appearance,
too, Of course, he is not upon trial We have
"uy MUM singly-
=. TIE JURY.
W. Aver then proceeded to interrogate the
Ivy, The usual line Of questions was asked,
i ina hr: aver expressed his satisfaction with all
col lngersoll said that before proceeding to
Examine the jurors be wanted to enter formal
te9uest Tor the peremptory challenges:
"a Al nrst Judge Blodgett was disposed to think
sus4 Tue peremptory challenges on each side
We're limited to three.
~ Gol Ingessoll insisted on his right TO ten: He