The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-01-27
NO M|NC|NG OF WORDS IN THIS.
County Attorney Stapeton Makes Startling Allegations
Concerning Judge Clancy's Court

and inserting after the word guilty.
the words in the second degree. That
the court, upon reading the verdict,
laughed aloud in open court, and told
the jury that that would not do at
ALL and again instructed them to re-
tire. handing to the jury the form of
a verdict which the judge of said court
then and there prepared in his own
handwriting, and which, after the title
of the court and cause, read as follows
We, the jury, find the defendant,
Frank Moody, not guilty.
THAT the jury thereupon retired, and
after some further elaboration re-
turned into court with verdict in ac-
cordance with the instructions of the
court, which said verdict was prepared
in due form by the jury, they, how
ever, refusing to sign the verdict in
| the handwriting of the court above
quoted, but returning the same. with
the other papers, unsigned. That the
| court, at the time the jury brought in
said verdict of murder in the second
degree refused to receive the same or
to allow the clerk to file or read 1T to
the jury: that thereupon, and after the
rendition of the verdict of the jury ac-
quitting the defendant under stress and
by the coercion of the court, the court
discharged the said jury together with
the defendant, Frank Moody. That
subsequently the state, by its attor-
neys, gave oral notice of their intention
| to appeal from the order of the court in
structing the jury to acauit the de-
PENDANT, and secured from the court an
order directing the stenographer to
transcribe his minutes of the evidence
taken at said trial, in order to perfect
the said appeal. That counsel for the
state secured from the court an extern
sion until the second day of February,
1885, in which to prepare, serve and file
| their bill of exceptions. That the re-
| spondent herein, William w. Wilson, as
stenographer of Department No. or
| the said district court, has, up to this
date. utterly failed to perform his duty
as required by section 372 of the code
of civil procedure, in writing out at
length and filing with the clerk of the
court the exceptions and objections, and
the rulings, decisions and opinions of the
court. taken during the said trial, where
by and by reason of such neglect the
plaintiff herein has been unable to pre-
pare proper bill Of exceptions That
William w. Wilson. respondent herein,
is the duly appointed, qualified and act
ing stenographer of the said Department
No. of said district court of Silver
Bow county, over which the Hon. Will
lam Clancy, judge as aforesaid, preSides,
| and took the testimony given upon the
| said trial by the witnesses. as such quail
| flied and acting stenogfapher. That the
| relator and affiant herein and his as
| sociate counsel, John T. Baldwin, esq,
| have repeatedly requested the said Will
| lam w. Wilson to prepare the said tran
| script of the evidence given on the said
| trial, so that the same might be had in
| time to perfect said appeal; that the re-
| spondent William w. Wilson, has as
| frequently made various excuses why
| the same could not be furnished by
| him; that the time within which the
| said appeal may be perfected will ex-
| pire by limitation of law on the 10th
| day of February, 1898, and no effort has
| SO far been made by the said respondent
| 10 transcribe his notes of the said trial.
| That the respondent herein promised
afflant and his associate counsel, nearly
one month ago, that he would have said
| evidence ready for delivery, duly iran
scribed, by the 18th day of January,
1898. That no trial was had nor were
| the services of said respondent re-
quired in court during the interval from
Dec. Is. 1897, to Jan. II. 1898. That the
only case in which counsel are anxious
for a transcript of the evidence in addi-
ton to the case of the state of Mon
tana against Frank Moody, is the case
of the state against ID. n. Dickinson,
in which the defendant has given no.
tiee of his intention to move for new
trial, and which case was tried prior to
the case of the state against Moody, the
charge being grand larceny. That in
that case counsel for D. n. Dickinson
stipulated with counsel for the state
pend the work of getting out the eyi-
dence in the Dickinson case and pro-
coed with the transcript of the evidence
in the Moody case. That respondent
herein agreed to the stipulation and
further agreed to proceed with the work
of transcribing his notes of the Moody
case which said stipulation and agree
ment was entered into on the morning
of the Esd day of January, 1898, and that
on the evening of that day the re-
spondent herein announced that special
counsel had been engaged in the Dicken-
son case and that the judge of Depart
ment No. of said district court had
| ordered him to get out the transcript of
his notes in the said Dickinson case al
though there is no record, so far as
affiant is informed and believes, of any
new counsel in the said case.
THAT affiant believes, and has reason
| to believe, that the judge Of Depart
| ment No. of the said district court,
Hon. William Clancy, is seeking by i'm
direction and by unfairly, unlaWfully
and illegltimately controlling the action
of respondent herein, TO prevent the APP
peal on the part of the state, from the
order aforesaid. from being perfected
within the time allowed by law. and
charges, on information and belief, UNI
equivoeally, that the said judge has
either an undue influence over the re-
spondent herein, whereby he is seeking
10 cirCumyent the states attorneys in
their efforts to appeal from the ruling Of
the court. or that the said respondent
herein is in collision with the said judge
and conniving at and assisting in said
attempt to prevent the perfecting of said
appeal. within the time allowed by law.
That the evidence on the part of the
state on the trial of said cause was of
such a character as to take the case en-
| trely out of the discretion and beyond
| the power of the court TO direct the
| jury as aforesaid. and likewise was of
| such a character as justified the jury.
under their oath, in returning into court,
contrary to the advice of the court, with
q verdict of murder in the second de-
gree. That affiant is informed and
| verify believes that Hon. William
| Clancy, judge as aforesaid, made re-
peated declarations 10 third parties. prior
/ To the trial of said cause. TO the effect