St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-03-09
WILL BE HARD FOUGHT.
The Trial of Representative Mark
ham for Bribery.

The Markham bribery Case is now
under way, and from the way the at
torneys contend and squabble it will
likely prove bitter fight. During the
forenoon session OF yesterday, Assist
ant County Attorney Peterson stated
that the state expected 10 show that MIR.
Markham not only solicited a hribe
from James E. Glass, but had limited in
unmistakable terms that money would
be accepted from E. w. Backus and II.
c. Akeley. The defense made vigor-
Gus protest against the admission of any
such evidence, Oh the grounds that it
was not material to the case, and That
it went beyond the reading of the in
dictment. Judge Hicks, after listening
to the arguments on the question, ruled
for the defense. He said:
Counsel for the state must makethis
Indictment stand or fall on its own base,
and the counsel must abstain from any
mention of these facts when addressing
the jury. There are but three eXcep-
tons to the general rule of law, which
is very clear In its holding that one
offease cannot be introduced to prove
another. The three exceptions are i'll
cases of conspiracy, forgery and passing
counterfeit money. When, in such
cases, 1t becomes necessary to establish
the essential fact Of intent, a wider
range of testimony is allowed. but in the
case at bar We cannot infringe upon the
general rule.
while not deciding this question
absolutely the counsel will be able to
gather from the courts remarks the
ruling which will follow when the teS-
"A
shown that these conversations with
Backus and Akeley are material to the
case at issue then the testimony would
be admissible. Again, if the state can
show that the defendant on these occa-
caslons referred directly to his CONVEX
sotlon with Glass, the evidence might
be admissible. but his general refer
cree to Glass as you fellows is not
enough. and, further, If the indictment
had charged the defendant with asking
bride from the lumbermen'S assOcia-
ton. the evidence would be admissible,
but as it is, it must not come ill.,"
In the afternoon the jury was brought
III from the little room where they had
been cooped during the time of the
arguments. Mr.. Peterson then made
his address TO the jury. He said that
he expected to prove that during the
session OF the legislature. when the bill
for scaling logs was before the COM
mIttee, Mr.. Markham came to Mime
apolis. and in the presence of Mr.. Glass
said that tie bill was in danger of not
passing, for the reason that there was
| sentiment against it, and the father or
tie measure, J. T. Wyman, was With
out influence IL the committee, but that
lis passage might be secured if $1,000
was raised. MIR. Glass declined to give
hin any money, and then Mr.. Mark
ham voted against the bill in commit
tee and in the house, both Of which he
had threatened to do if the money was
| not raised.
The first witness called was j. J.
Lomen. chief clerk III the Office of the
secretary of state. He produced the
certificate of MIR. Markham's election as
member of the legislature from the
Fifty third legislative district. The
oath OF office OF The members of the Leg
islature, 10 which Mr.. Markham's name
was attached, was also produced.
j. L. Wyman, who fathered the bill
| in the legislature, was next called to
| the stand. Then followed a lot of OBJ
| JectiOns on the part OF the defense, but
Mr.. Wyman was finally allowed 10 tes-
| tify that the bill in question was re-
| ferred on Jan. 20 to the house commit
lee on logs and lumber. and that it was
| reported back March Is.
At this juncture i'll the proceedings.
| court adjourned b cause of the death of
a relative of Mr.. Peterson. SO