Arizona weekly citizen., 1895-11-30

PHILADELPHIA, NOV. l9-IOddy Dad
been fixed for argument of the motion
for new trial for Holmes. Judge
Arnold, who presided during the trial,
which resulted in Holmes conviction
for the murder Of Pietzel, was jJined
by Judge Thayer and Wilson, sitting as
court en- banc.
Mr.. Shoemaker asked that argument
be postponed. He urged that since
the verdict had been rendered the de-
Tense had come into possession Of in
formation and additional clues OF vital
Importance to the case which would re-
suit in Holmes acquittal. Subseqr en-:
to the trial, he continued, they ob;aiu-
ed Information of a persoo who had
known Pietzsl when be lived OH Cailow
Hill street. This person, Blanche A.
Ham gan, had made affidavit in SUBJ
stance as follows:
"In August, 1894, she kept a cigar
store, and had talked with Pietzel. then
known es Perry. August 30, in her
store, she told him she would have &c
leave the store and visit dying friend,
whereupon Pietzel spoke of tbs uncert-
ainties OF life, saying that lie had more
trOu tie than any one would suppose and
he would not care il it Was be who
was dying instead of her friend. He
spoke OF his many troubles ard adced
the end would com sOor, a3 hs couic
not stand It much longer. Ali his &C
tions and words tended to show thoughts
of suicide"
Shoemaker said Mrs. Hanaigan woul4
have come for wsTd with this testimony
before, but she disllked Do;oriety aud
mad teen out Of the city. Nov, how
ever, es she found there vas life at
stake, she had CONS forward.
District Attorney Graham asked that
before this api lication be passed upon,
Mrs. Hsnnigan be called to the stand.
Mr.. RoteD, who is associated with Shoe
maker, replied they had been unable t.
find her, that the affidavit had bset
procured by John Sweck!er, detective.
and counsel would not peIm;t her
testify until they had an opportunity {
examine her privately, and sift the truth
of her statement.
In response to questions irCm tht
urt, Shoemaker ths n said the a(li
davit had been written by himself at III,
dictation of Mrs. tI8nnigan.
Graham said It became his duty T.
make a painful declaration. Dorirt
the early part OF the recent trial he hac
received information that efforts has
been made to procrre false testimony b!
bribery. Subsequently, he learned thes,
efforts we're being prosecuted to th'
Ind. Thereupon be sent for the person
thus mployed to furnish evidence anC
be was in court at the present time. I'll,
said:
Il will produce her and show she wa:
employ ed by Ar. Shoemaker, was tskeD
to his flee and questioned and said she
knew nothing about the case, and tn.
attorney told her that was all right anc
she vas induced upon payment 20 her
Of $50 TO s!gn On affidavit which had
been already prepared"
10 support Of this statement by era
nam, D-tac i've Geyer testitis that dur
Irg The trial he W IS called upon by JohI
Sweckler, who said ;ba. Shoemaker ask
ed him TO procure woman WHO wouiC
swear to csrtain facts. The next d y
Sweckler called again and showed him
typewritten affidavit. This was before
the woman had been looked for. Geyer
submitted the matter to the dIstric;
attorney and on his advice after the trial
Geyer procured the woman and intro
ced her to Sweckler. who in turn tool
her t. Shoemaker. After seversi inter
views with him she signed the sfijdavit
ard received two so bills which sh,
marked With initials for the purpose Of
liberalization. The sIppo ed Mrs
Hauui2an. who said her name was Mar
garet Reah, corrOborsted the story u
detail, producing the money. She De
clared that Shoe maker had neither rea
nor told her Of the contents o. the rffids
Wit, and shs signed it in absolute ignor
rnce. The statement made in couT
by Shoemaker that she dictated to hin
vas fase.
Mr.. Shoemaker here arose and excii
ed cried: 81 did not say so. / explicit
iy-"
Oue of the three judges interrupte.
hin With: There is 10 doubt whateve.
of you having sGid it,"
The district attorney then Sad he hsc
u copy of tie affidavit in his office befort
the woman had been found.
Shoemaker pleaded for time to rebu'
Ihese charges and Judge Thayer signi6
cantly replied: "You are C rtainly 10
position requiring ID, ughtfu.Gess."
John SgeCkier, c0rrotorsted the pre-
ceding witnesses.
Mr.. Graham was pursuing the II qGirl
about making the affidavit when shoe
maker excitedly jumped 10 MS f.et an'
said: Il will Acknowledge | dictated
he affidavit to a steuographer."
"Sit down, don't say a word" mutter
ID Rotan to Shoemaker.
During all his scene Holmes sat j.
the dock, his cold blue eyes leve!led a.
Shoemaker, a sneer upon his lips. Ora
ham and the court united in acquittiB,
Mr.. Rotan of any part in the ALLEGED
subornGtIou OF perlured evidence GnC
the district attorney said as Ed affidavit
with the so-called rev evidence. haf
been made basis for application foi
continuance, and as it had been PROVED
a fabrication the application should fall
The court sustained him ard ordered ar
gument for a new trial to proceed.
District Attorney Graham, in reply t.
Rotan, reviewed the testimony agaire
Holmes IL detail snd urged that the case
NJ d been proved beyond the possibility
II a reasonable doubt, aud that the
INntllle Ot 1CN bfldl NOulO Ci-tnil y cot
ken and trouble and possibly result
~ perversiOn OF justice.
kofen made the closing address t. th
'ou,t, but developed no new contention,
'mi ly Feiteratlpg and emphasizing
"ruer declarations AID mai1taiuire
val Plrtz com mitfed suicide, and The
~ nmonweRlth produced no LEV
violence to contro, ert the assertion.
AT the conclusion Of the argument. |
Judge Thayer, speaking for the court
said III y would give the csss the gray
est consideration. Then turning to Shoo
maker, the judge sad:
Il regret now have very disagree
able duty to perform to%arde you,
member of this bar and gu attorney o.
this court. Ia view OF the DEVELOPMENT |
this morning ard the testimony of w;t
neSSes whom YOU hare heard concerning |