The Dickinson press. (Dickinson, Stark County, D.T. [i.e. N.D.]) 1883-1927, 1896-11-21
in KENT'S BEHALF
JUDGE MCCONNELL CoNrERs WITH
GOV. ALL[N.

GOV. ALLIN.
He Reviews the Case at Length and
Expresses Doubt as to the Guilt
Of the Condemned Alarderer-It IL
Thought That Gov. Allin Will
Commute the Sentence to Life Ina.
prisoameut.
Bismarck. n. D.. Special. Nov. 1e.-lt will
soon De known whether Kent. now under
repFteve In the Fargo Jail. will be hanged
or sent to the peni,antiary fOr life. The
unusual spectacle OF judge who has
sentenced man to death appearing before
the chief executive Of tile state asking
commltation Of the sentence has attracted
general attention. .!udgc Mcconnell ar
rived from Fargo this morning and was
consulting with the governor and States
Attorney vOss Of Morton county during the
entire day. Voss Is decidedly opposed to
Executive interference. but the general opin-
lon is that the sentence will be commuted.
Following is Judge McCOnnell's plea to the
governor.
''The telegram that I sent you on last
Wednesday morning from Sherbrooke Is as
follows: Hope, n. D.-Hon Roger Allin:
That the writing In the black book should
be SO infinitely written beforehand. the alb
sence Of Ehrlichman on both trials. and a
possibility OF his tampering with the black
hook, aud the lack Of Keut's motives are
some Of the things that caused me often to
hesitate and doubt. Many Things occurring
on the trial rsa;udicial to the defendant. 1t
is hard to tell their weight OH the jury In
fixing the death penalty
This states In coIc.se form the conclu-
sions Of the operations that have been at
work In my mind In reference to this case.
1t Ia over year since I saw the record In
this case, and l weGii not undertake to
refer to many important facts In the case,
but shall confine what l may say to the
black book. 1t will be observed that that
is claimed by SwidensSy 10 have been writ
ten before the homicide. 1t will be observed
that it goes into the miEntla. The events
that did transpire took place as therein
entered, even to the manner In which the
woman was actually Killed. 1t describes the
manners and the actions Of the different
members Of the hcGsehold that night; how
different ones walked ai,:ut the room, about
the gun and matters of that kind. In q
few days after this Sw;.lcnsky IL called bc-
fore the coroner's jury and he gives his
story, and the story as told to the coroner
is to all intents aud purposes, with only
that in the book. When 1t il considered
that be wrote this book on the Sunday pre-
ceding the Tuesday night OF the homicide,
and the fact that he Is
An llliterate Foreigner
unaccustomed to our language. 1t presents
the possible question whether or not II 1t
was written beforehand. whether his mem-
ory was good enough to have recollected
and repeated the contents Of the black book
before the coroner. 1t is one of the most
inconceivable things connected with the
history of this case that these eve ITS should
;x,
In the case showing that ;>Hidensky and
Kent did have falling out ma were not Oh
good terms for a few days at least, or some
two or three weeks, before the hOiaicide, Us
Is testified to by the Martins and Is cor
roborated by Earl Kent, the son.. who was
sky himself.
''If 1t was important for the state to sus-
gest that the relations Of Mr.. and Mrs.
Kent were not friendly, 1t Is to be pre-
sumed that Frank Laird, his wife's brother,
would have known of 1t, ;Icnt and the
Lairds having few years ago been associ-
ated In business together. Would he not
have bcen an important witness upon this
point? Yet he was in the court room and
was not usei as witness. 1t will be
shown that It becomes a very material
question bea7ing on the crediDility Of Swi.
densky, who swears that tA!s book was
written beforehand. Whether or not 1t was
SO written as re states. this black book Is
| considered by the sheriff and others famil-
lar with the facts at the time to be Of no
account. It's materiality revcr became
prominent IEi:i GGe Ehrlich-aan comes up
to Mandan ni.d obtains q confession from
Swidene':y. I: is testified by the sheriff
sion in Minneapolis and was IN the office Of
the Lairds. 1t will be observed that the
testimony does show that Ehrlichman was
working for the Lairds. 1t shows that by
subterfuge and claiming to be an attorney
and being able to represent Swidensky In
his case, he would be able to clear him or
TO help him.
ut will also he observed In taking into
acc onnt Ebrlichman's connection with this
case that t;tis is testimony tending to
show he received $1,0cO 1n- the work he
did, and his promise @; $500 more. This
man man Ehri,:hln:n, it viii be conceded. after
having got this statement from Swidensky,
| was q most material witness. 1t Is a Gig
| nificant fact that In the case he acted as
a detective. It is further fact, and was
commented upon to the jury and to the
court, that Ehrlichman was
Absent From Both Trials,
and this fact was never explained to the
Jury and 1t has never heea satisfactorily
| explained to me why Ehrl!chman was not
used as witness. 1t may De said that
he was out Of the state, out Of the jurisdic-
tion Of this court The same could he said
l
neapolls. who was present and did testify.
1t is unnecessary for me to call your at
tention to the fact that there is no Judge
in the trial Of q case where witness ap.
pears upon the stand In his professional
character as a detective that does not warn
with but little weight unless corroborated,
because It is q known fact that they are
working for money, and that too often
they do not stop to consider the results
that might follow their false testimony.
| ''Ehrlichman. as the records show. had
the Lairds, 1t being In their office. He
would have been a most important witness
In this point.
Frank Laird was In the court room dur.
ing the trial, bat he was not called to
ex-lain about ihe black book while it was
tioa with 1t II he had any. Whether the
book Is In Swidensky's Handwriting or not
no person knows except ~ Swl5ensky' q
statement. No expert was put upon the
stand to give his opinion that the writing
In the book was the same as that OF
swIdeDsky's. also another piece Of writing
of swidensky's in evidence which he wrote
| while on the stand. Even II 1t 10 In bis
handwriting. night there not be a posi-.
bility Of Ehrischman or some one else fur
nishipg him with the book and also trans.
| latiOn In his own language OF the evidence
that had been taken before the coroner,
and which had been taken down In short.
hand and transcript made Of it and
| which was published In the Mandan papers
Again, 1t might be suggested why, II he
could have had the book even without any
translation of bis testimony before the
coroner. he could not have recoIlected what
he had testified to and write 1t in the
book?
eat the time Ehrllchman got this con.
fession from Swidensky his statement was
taken down In writing and In that writing
there is no reference to the black book
1t is very plain that from Ehrlichman'l
connection with the case he would have
been q most important witness and ought
to have been present where his statemen:
/ would have been on oath and where he
would have been subject to searching
and scrutinizing crossexaminatlon. shall
| call your attention to the fact of Kent's
Motive In killing His Wife.
1.-THE records show that In this case they
were living peaceably and harmoniohsly TO-
eether. swidens.y and Earl Kent testi
fsd ~ to one or two trivial misundfrstand
ings between Mr.. Kent and his wife. but
Ean Kent's and Martins testimony Is that
thov voro 0otf9nO Alon0 raaooah1v and wp1l