The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-01-28
BUTTE News.
JUDGE CLANCY DENIES IT
w. w. Wilson Also Backs Up
the Judges Statement.
is PREPARING HIS CASE
Wilson Says That Other Gases Were
Ahead of the Moody Case and That
1t Was Impossible to Get
Out the Transcript.

Judge Clancy and his stenographer,
William W. Wilson. both deny the
truth of the charges made in the coun-
~ attorneys affidavit in the supreme
court mandamus proceedings relative
to the stenographer's failure to make
q transcript of the testimony in the
Moody case and they are preparing to
make a showing in the supreme court
next Monday Judge Clancy adjourned
his court an hour earlier than usual
yesterday for the purpose of devoting
some of his time to "A consideration of
the mandamus case. He denied. in EN-
phatic terms, that he in any way tried
to influence his stenographer or ham
per the state in taking an appeal in the
Moody case.
Il have other cases ahead of the
Moody case" said Mr.. Wilson, "and
/ simply declined to give the Moody
case the preference. There were
number of cases tried at the same time
and appeals We're taken in all of them.
/ got the Shafer case out in advance
of others to accommodate the county
attorney. and have had another type
writer assist me right along. We could
not get out the Moody case unless we
had let others go, and declined to do
that"
The county attorney stated that 1t
=
action he did or he never would have
been able To get transcript of the
case. The charges. he said. would be
substantiated. and he would get his
transcript for an appeal, and that is all
he wanted. The charge is made in Mir.
Stapletons affidavit that Judge Clancy
changed and falsified the records of
the Moody case. Reference is made to
an entry on the clerks minutes under
the date of Nov. 81 1897, which reads
as follows:
This day the defendants are present
in person and by counsel. w. ]. Naugh-
ton and j. II. McClernan, and the state
being represented by the chief deputy
county attorney and j. T. Baldwin, as
sociate counsel therein. and this being
the time for the setting of these causes
for trial, counsel for plaintiff moves
the court that the case of Thomas
F'raney be set for trial ahead of the
case of defendant Frank Moody, which
motion is objected to by counsel for
the reason that the case of Moody was
set first heretofore at election of coun-
" attorney, and after argument OF
counsel said motion is by the court
overruled, to which ruling of the court
plaintiff, by counsel, duly objects.
Thereupon the court sets the trial of
the defendant. Frank Moody, for Dec.
6, 1897, to which order of setting coun-
sci for plaintiff duly objects"
The alteration or alleged Justification
consists of the quoted words, lat cleo
ton of county attorney" which We're
inserted in Judge Clancy's handwriting
after the minutes had been read and
approved. Originally. when the case
against Franey and Moody were set
for trial. the defendants demanded sep
arate trials. Under the law the county
attorney may elect whom he shall try
first. and he denies that he ever made
the election Anyway. Moody's case
was set first and Franeys was Ia fol-
low. subsequently the setting was va
Gated and a month or so later the case
again came UP TO be set for trial and
the county attorney asked that the
Franey case be set first. as nearly all
of the states direct testimony was
against Franey.
Judge Clancy refused to set the case
that way. claiming that the state had
once elected To try Moody first and
would have to abide by it. The result
is We'll known.