Daily globe., 1879-03-20
LAUTENsCHLAGER.
The Effort Being Made to Secure Him Z
New Trial.

New Trial.
As has been announced from time to time,
and postponed as frequently, the case of George
Lautensoh,ager finally came up yesterday
morning on motion for new trial. The case
is too we'll known TO even receive synoptical
repetition here. The district court judges
(Wilkin, Blilland Simons) set in houc to hear
the motion and the argument
Messrs. 8. u. Pierce aud Edmund Gribble
appeared for the defendant, and County Attor-
ney Rogers was present to represent the State.
MR. aRIBRIE's s PREFACE.
Mr.. Gribbie opened for the defendant by
stating why the motion was made. He claimed
it arose from the discovery of new and impor-
tant evidence. Thereupon he read an affidavit
signed by George Herman, which in substance
stated that on the night, Nov. lat, 1874, which
it ls alleged that George Lautenschlager, with
many passed by their (the Lick's) residence
only 8 few minutes before the deed was done,
and he heard high words and threats made by
Lick against his wife in her presence.
The affidavit further relates that
the next day, before learning of the murder,
the affiant left for New York, and no knows
edge of tho affair came to him until July of
1878, whenshe learned of it 10 Saltwater from
an old newspaper which fell in his way.
Mr.. Gribble stated that the Importance of
this.pew testimony would be analyz by Mr..
Pierce. .,,--;;s'.@E,,.,
NIB. PIERoE's ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Pierce followed in long and strong ar
gument to show cause why the motion should
be granted. In this connection and as made
necessary under the law, he reviewed at length
the evidence upon which Lautenschlager was
convicted at the March term of 1875. He took
the evidence in detail, presented in every sup.
and FROM oNu noA
arrived at the conclusion that the
belief of Lautenschlagers gnilt was untenable,
or at any rate it presented
an insurmountable doubt as to the fact of his
guilt and presumable one of innocence.
Counsel denied the intention to charge any
one with the crime of the murder of Mrs. Lick,
but did claim that in view of the past evidence
and the new testimony to be presented the
crime could not be laid against his client. .ss
just about this juucture of the proceedings
the court got to whispering together. Judge
Wilkin interrupted the speaker, and stated that
priety of having the prisoner, Lautenschlager,
present during this proceeding.
Both attorneys, Messrs. Pierce and Rogers,
declared that they would make no point as to
this. s55.sse
At this tho court stated in the case the neces-
sity arose in their minds, Lautenschlager would
be produced in court. Eas:.s &
MR. ROGERS REMARKS.
In opposing the motion for q new trial, Mr..
Rogers contended that the affidavit setting
forth the new testimony only gave accumu.
lative evidence It was the follower in intent,
import and purpose of the affidavits upon
which former motion was argued and denied
He also took exception to the indefinite char
acter of the affidavit; it only claimed that "a
| man and woman" were heard making use of
the aggressions set forth in the affidavit. After
all these two might not have been Mr.. and
Mrs. Lick Furthermore the afiant
swore he knew none of the parties
| to the affair at the time these expressions were
| uttered. Counsel called in question the re-
| markable memory of the affiant under the cir
cumstances, it coming to him with such accu.
| racy after lapse of four years. He appre.
| hended there was some collusion about it.
Herman was in the penitentiary, 80 was Laut-
ensohlager. This, too, he took as ground OF
| the penitentiary for some infamous crime, and
he questioned the propriety of attaching any
! great Importance to his promised evidence, es.
| pecially SO, when the nature and limited ex.
| tent of it was foretold In the affidavit.
MIR. Pierce briefly replied, more for the pur-
pose of showing Herman had been unfortu.
nate, and also to declare his own sincerity in
| urging the motion.
The court took the batch of papers, a trans
oript of the testimony on the trial, affidavits
etc. in charge and remarked that an opinion
would be rendered at very near day. Their
| the half dozen who had been in attendance
withdrew.