The record-union., 1891-02-08
is FORGOUS INSANE?
The Wife-SIayer Says That He Can
Prove That Heis.
Testimony That VIII Have to be Taken
in France-AttorneyJ johnson
Registers a .sK1ek.''

shot and killed his wife several weeks
ago, says he is insane, and ON that plea
he will seek to evade punishment.
Forgous' case was called in Superior
Judge Van Fleets Court yesterday.
Grove L. Johnson, the prisoners attor-
ney, asked for an extended postpone
ment of the trial, saying that it would be
necessary to send to France for certain
very material testimony, and it was de-
sired that the Court appoint commits
sion to secure this testimony. Mr.. John
son, in support of his request, then read
to the court an affidavit sworn toby
Forgous, the defendant.
This affidavit contained the first ink
ling of what Forgous' defense is to be.
FoRGoUs' STATEMENT.
Over his own signature, and under
oath, Forgous declares that he will not be
ready for trial for some time yet, as he
wants to present the testimony of DIR.
Latieule, Mrs. Delphine Delfiou and Mr..
| Laire, all of Cransac, Aveyron, France; Mr..
| Vigue, of Department la Grouse, France,
| and various other persons, which teSti-
mony will be very material to his de-
tense. The persons named, he says, knew
him when he resided near Cransac, and
WIFI He worked Ill lne mines lnefe.
| They were familiar with the fact that, in
1881, he met with an accident by getting
caught in some machinery and having
/ his skull crushed. He did not regain
consciousness for two months after this
| injury. After his physical recovery, be
says, he was discharged from the mines
because his mind was affected and he was
| insane. He remained in this condition
for several years. He says that Virginia
| Forgous, his cousin; Pierre Carries, his
uncle. and Marriane Forgous, and Rose
Carries, his aunts, can all testify that
HE WAS INSANE
After the accident referred to. He con-
tinued in this condition, he says, until
1887, when he began to improve. He
then came to California, and the voyage
improved him greatly. He had never
fully recovered, however. and while at
times he seemed perfectly sane, there
were other times, since his arrival in this
country, when his memory became
blank and he did not know what he was
doing.
After reading the affidavit, Mr.. John
son informed the court that he
had encountered unusual difficulties
in getting the affidavit from his
client, owing to an interference
on the part of District Attorney Ryan
He was surprised at Mr.. Ryan's actions
Mr.. Johnson said he had sent his son
| Hiram w. johnson, to the County Jail to
consult with Forgous, but the Sheriff hac
refused to take the prisoner out of the
cell, and Hiram Johnson was only al
lowed to converse with Forgous through
q small wicket and in the presence OF {
Deputy Sheriff When asked why this
was done, young Mr.. johnson was in
formed that orders had been received
frem the District Attorney not to allow
Forgous to be taken from his cell.
DIDN'T SAY SO.
! District Attorney Ryan denied posi-
lively that he had ever given any sucl
instructions to the Sheriff.
Mr.. johnson said then that it was
question of veracity between Mr.. Ryar
and the Sheriff, and he proposed to fine
out about it.
The matter was dropped temporarily
and Judge Van Fleet made an order
granting the request that commission
be appointed to take the testimony of tn,
witnesses mentioned in Forgous' aft
davit. The trial OF Forgous was ther
postponed until April next.
Later in the day attorney Johnson
accompanied by his son, appeared before
Judge Van Fleet and renewed his re
monstrance regarding the treatment h,
had received at the Sheriff's office. H
called upon Deputy County Clerk Dood,
to take the witness stand, and that gen
Hiram Johnson to Forgous' cell whel
the affidavit was taken. The Sheriff re
fused to allow Forgous to be taken from
the cell, and said it was because of order
received from the District Attorney.
Hiram Johnson gave testimony TO tn
same effect.
District Attorney Ryan still insisted
that he had given no instructions to tn
Sheriff. The Sheriff was sent for, but b
was out of town. Under Sheriff Bugbe,
responded, however, and upon taking tn
kept in
CLOSE CONFIN EMENT
Because of any instructions received fron
the District Attorney. 1t was because q
u new rule adopted in the Sheriff's office
to prevent escapes. Prisoners charge,
with murder were being guarded wit
particular vigilance.
AT this point Judge Van Fleet wante
to know what all this testimony had t
do with the court.
Mr.. johnson replied that he wishes
the court to instruct the Sheriff to permi
counsel to consult with their client
: whenever necessary.
Judge Van Fleet said he had not tn
power to issue such an order. He coul
not interfere with the Sheriff's method {
guarding prisoners. That official was re
sponsibie for the prisoners in his charge
and the court was not. The Judge added
however, that he had no doubt but tina
counsel could arrange the matter amicabl
with the Sheriff outside of court.
why, certainly" added District Al
torney Ryan, good-naturedly, ''ther
won't be any trouble about that. Nj
Johnson was only after my scalp an
way-and he didn't get it.''
| -----------e>-----------