The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1888-11-29
GARDNER GUILTY.
He Offers no Testimony in
Defense.
COL. HAINEs NOW on TRIAL.
The Governments Refuses Him n
Separate Trial Unless He VIII
Consent to Postponement.
COZ. HaINEs NOW on TRIAL.

AUBrRs. y. ", Nov, N-No evidence
was offered by the defense in the Gardner
smuggling case which went 10 the jary at
noon to-day. Counsel for the defendant
seemed 10 rely on technical points and the
failure Of proof on the part OF the govern
ment.
The lsst three counts Of the indictment
relating to alleged smuggling of 2eoo
pounds Of opium In October. Iss7. were
stricken out by the court. The jury was
out about an hour, when they brought In
verdict OF guilty on the first six counts OF
the Indictment.
The conspiracy case CT th.. United skssas
rs Gar 3ner, Eatnes and Stone was t.sRn
called for trial. Haines' attorney asked Tor
separate trial for his client and stated
that such had been the understanding
Throughout the term. The government re-
sisted the application and the court said
there was not sufficient time lest OF TIE
term 10 Try the defendants separately, bat
that il Haines woeld consent 10 allow the
case to so ever until the January term at
Albany. he would grant him separate
trial. Haines attorney insisted on the in
justice Of his client being tried with a man
just convicted in a case involving TO some
extent the same facts, but refused 10 con
sent 20 a continuance. This indicates that
the district attorney has been delaying the
case 30 as 10 force Haines into joint trial
or else to a continuance.
On opening his statement Assistant his
trict Attorney HOyt stated that he ex-
pected TO prove that conspiracy TO re
move opium from the ogdensburg Gus
tom house and tkus destroy the evidence
in Gsrduer's case was entered into last
March, and that subsequently, Mr. Stone
wrote to Mr.. Haiues two letters explain
ing the scheme. Nothing else was
stated as involving Mr. Haines and
no claim was made that he participated in
any OF the subsequent acts Of Stone or
Gardner. Ne prosecution is being pressed
against --stone. Lytfle or Cuminsky, the
men whom the government admit ae.
tually stole the opium. and the former of
whom was the principal participant in
the alleged conspiracy. This fact, to-
gether with the unfair treatment of
Haines by the district attorney, creates
much uniayorable comment here.
DETAILED REPORT.
AUBURN, \. Y, Nov. 2s-when the
United States court opened this morning
tut dlAbEutAS were 10
introduce l5o9 pounds of smuggled opium
in evidence in the Gardner case, which
was then eontinu d.
Hon. Richard Crowley, for defendant,
made another motion TO dismiss the case
on the ground that the indictment places
value of $40 per pound on opium, and no
evidence was advanced TO show that it
possessed any value. The motion was de-
MED
He then asked the court to rule that
there could be no conviction under the first
and sixth counts in the indictment, known
Ms smuggling couTss.
Counsel claimed that there was not a
shade OF evidence to show that defendant
brought opium over from Canada. even II
he did receive and conceal 1t. This also
was denied.
Mr.. Crowley surprised the lawyers and
spectators by announcing that he would
here rest his ease. He then summed up
for the defense, saying this was the most
remarkable tial he had ever witnessed
After the courtroom had been flooded with
trunks and packages and witnesses had
been sworn as TO what they contained the
government had seen fit to rest its case
without opening one of the trunks. and
not one of the jury could say what their
contents were. Only two small cans had
been opened-ones which chemist had
anaiy yzed-and it was not proved tha; they
contained opium. Who could saw defend
ant had smuggled any opium. He urged
the jury not TO draw any differences against
the defendant because he had not put him
on the stand in his own behalf. Every
prisoner stands with the great shield of
presumption OF innocence above him until
be is proved guilty. We resto case upon
the absence of legal evidence on tue part
OF the government.
United States Attorney Lockwood
summed up for the government. The ad-
dress Of the opposing counsel, he said
had mot said "A word ab0fff the axShanR4
but had simply srraigued the government
for not Introducing more evidence. The
court had found enough evidence in the
case 10 send ~ 10 the jury on question of
fact. He characterized defendant as a
man whose every step since the govern
ment got on his track had been connected
with crime. He then reviewed the testi-
mony OF tue principal witnesses for the
government aud urged that the perpetra-
tors OF such crimes should not go un-
punished.
Judge Coke charged the jury, saving he
regretted that some people looked upon
smuggling as a pardonabie Oftensc. II the
evidence were true in this case a heiuous
crime had been committed and the gov
erument had been defrauded Of sa5.0Oo.
There was no dispute as 10 the facts There
as no question but that the substance al
l,sed 10 be opium was smuggled into the
United States. He called the jury's atten-
ton TO GaFdners movements In Canada
under an assumed Dame and his threat to
put bullet through @ customs officer
when discovered near the river bsuk.
The Jury retired At noon, aud in three
quarters Of an hour returned With YER
eict ef guilty on six counts OF the in
dietment
Assistant tioyt then promptly moved the
case Of the United States against John c.
Haines, Erwin 4. Gardner, ard John W.
stoae. Judge Brnndage. OF Buffalo. de-
mandeG q separate trial for his client
Hants. District Attorney Lockwood oh
jeeted. The court held that the three cases
sbsuld b. tried together.