The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1894-01-24
TRIAL is ASKED
Counsel for Charles Jones Want
the Verdict OF the Jury
Set Aside.
Many Reasons That Are Ad-
vanced IN Support OF the
Motion.
Judge Knowles Takes the Matter Under
Confederation Untn the April
Term OF His Court.

The latest siep 10 the case Of the United
States versus Charles Jones. taken by de-
fendanrs attornoys. John Il. BsrfoWa and
r.. q. Russell occupied the attention of
Judge knowles during the entire afternoon
yesterday. 10 consisted IN arguing their
three motions, already nled, one to SET
aside the verdict Of she jury. on the ground
that IL was not supported by ths evidences;
another to arrest Judgment on ths ground
that the crime charged was not within the
iurisd iotion Of she eourti and third 10 set
aside the vs;dci and gra nj new trial. on
the grounds Of errors Of the COURT In hd-
msttinE Illegal evidence on the part Of
prosecution; In misdifeoting. and emitting
20 direct. the jury In material matters OF
Law; ia overriding defendants motion 70
acquit on ground Of fatal variance; ani be-
cause tho We diet lie sRainst the law and the
evidence.
The nttorneys for the defense urged that
the difference ia the name Of tho man
killed, being ssiboft in the IN iietmsnt and
Schubert in the proof is fatal. and should
have teen 90 decided by the eouft. bat hav-
ing been given TO she iuFy their YER diet
upon II was absolutely wrong. The other
points vsrs that the Uaitsd states deputy
marshal. Jackson. was not a legal officer;
that. IL be vas, he had no suthoaitY 10
arrest for a crime rRAinat the state Law.
highway robbery on the Northern Pacific
train. the only felony asducsd BY the evil
dsnce; that Schubert wss not a legal mem
ber Of bis posse. which is limited by law 30
three persons in ths Indian country; and
that the attsmptsd arrest was therefore
illegal; that these faets and the msnAoing
manner Of the arrest in firing upon the
men without sufficient notification Of The
object. necessarily rsduced the ohsnas
to only mAnslaughtsr at the furthest.
that in view Of thess faetI the omission 10
charge the Jury as 70 mAnslaughter vas 20
the serious prejudice OF oefendanti that
the court erred IN admitting the testimony
Of MOots as 10 statements made By sheT-
mer, n cs-cOnHpiTatoi, - 20 the Northern
Pacific train iobbeTy long after the cOn-
spiraoY had ended. Ths question whether
the United States couTta have jurisdiction
Of the killing Of vhtte~man hy a white
map on an Indian reservation, had already
been passed upon by Judge Knswlss anu
decided 10 fsvor Of the coufps jurisdiction.
and no argument was made upon IL, bat the
point was saved by the defense.
District Attorney +. ID. Weed replied a.
length "a ell the points raised by defend
ants counsel. upholding abe light Of ths
deputy marshal 20 make the ETrest. IL not
a. an officer. then IS private person. He
hsld that there Was no evidences reducing
the crime to manslaughtsr and argued
sgainst the technioality OF she variant
names Of the deesassd.
At tho conclusion Of the srRu msnt Judge
Knowles said that he would not decide the
matter before the April tsrm Of court, be-
ing much burdsned with otlor work. and
desiring 90 examine into the powers Of ar
rest on Indian reservations