The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-08-05

I have read in the testimony as July IL,
1894. r. Warren Toole brought James
II. Boyce and Mr.. Darnold into my Of
fee and stated to me tina he was very
busy Just then and was not able to at
tend to the matter which they desired
attended to, and asked me II ! would
not attend to II. Thereupon a state
ment was made to me by Boyce ana
Darnold in regard to certain testimony
which Darnold had given upon the triai
of the case of Talbot vs.. Andrew }.
Davis. ir.. and the First National BANK
of Butte. That that testimony was false
and the matter was gone over as 10
what the facts about II were. The way
il was. was tina he had given that false
testimony and Mr.. Darnold said he was
willing to make an affidavit that II was
not true. But before the affidavit was
drawn. n Immediately upo making
that statement, he inquired Of me what
liability he would incur crimtnally.
told him that by this affidavit he had
confessed that he had committed per-
Jury upon the trial of that case; thai
he was liable for a penitentiary Onense.
think / told him what the penalty
was. He would subject himself 20 prose-
Cution for perjury. ] remember that
advised him fully Of the risks he was
taking. He was then unwilling to make
the affidavit and wanted to know II
there was not some way by which he
could he protected from prosecution. j
told him IL often occurred when men
were guilty jointly with others that one
was permitted to turn states evidence
under agreement Of immunity from pun
ishment: at least with a tacit under
, Handing with the prosecuting attorney
that he would not be punished, and II
he was, that punishment would be mitl-
gated, and that in a case Of this kind,
: where he had committed a great wrong.
1 ~ go nlyn oar
tain amends in the interests of justice
and the truth. as he was able TO, and at
that state of the proceedings he want
ed an agreement that he would not be
{ prosecuted, and II he was prosecuted
. that the governor could be Interested
: with TO exercise the ~pardoning power. ]
remember that ] explained the whole
: situation TO him fully. ! told him thai
= I had no power to protect him, but
would do what | could 10 avert a prose
cution against him. and he finally
agreed that he would make the affidavit
IL | would make a writing tn this ef-
\ feet: that Mr.. Boyce was to keep the
!; afidavit until some guarantee satisfac'
- tory to him could he obtained that ht
= would not be prosecuted. And will
= that understanding the affidavit wat
y, drawn up. sworn to and delivered Il
- Mr.. Royce. who carried II away Will
!. him. This writing was made and sign
- tQ Nv NE anu wi w hAiii
- did you after having that affidavi
20 made go to Butte shortly
I Yes, sir
How long afterward?"
q 1T was a few days afterward. Jus
4, how long l do not remember, but
in short time"
~ did you read the testimony Of MI
Corbett. given in this hearing. abou
or a meeting that took place betweeI
4, yourself, Mr.. Boyce. judge T0nle. Nj
Corbett and, I think. Mr.. Darnold7'
Il remember IT,"
who was present."
Of Mr.. Boyce was there. : was ther
MS and i think Mr.. Clayberg was there
In fact, ! am quite satisfied he wa!
Mr.. Darnold was not there. He he
left the state. ] never saw Mr.. Darr
old after he left my office. the dav tina
I'D AFFIDAVIT was given"
,at Mr. Corbett testified that Mr.. Dar
ice mold was present at that meeting?"
"Hc was mistaken about il. VI
he Darnold was not there. | am pCsitiv
INT because ! came over here with refe'
= ence to that Darnold affidavit. As Il
matter stood when IL left my office v
had no right to use it. It was deli'
cred to him and wac not to be deIi'
cred to me until some arrangemei
= could be made satisfactory to MIR. Da
- mold with reference to the Grimm
| ~ 'sAN ~ ANAAa AAAAAis ~nAA' 80
. came over here and saw Mr.. Boyce ]
told me shat DaTnold was gone. tn
he did not know where he was.
questioned him as TO the circumstanc
%, under which he left. what knowledI
he had of his leaving. what inhuenc
were brought TO bear 10 make hi
leave. and he professed ignorance
why he left. but said that he W
alarmed after giving that affidavit (
fear he would be prosecuted"
About the meeting at Mr.. Corbet
Office"
Il know he was not there because
never saw him any more, and ! h
TO see him before the affidavit cou
be used. and | wanted to consult I
prosecuting attorney. lay the matt
before him and get his views as
what ne would do under the circui
stances. | thought that perhaps W
such a spirit OF leniency on the part
the county attorney Mr.. Darnold mig
be willing TO take chances and let
have that AFFIDAVIT. But II was neN
contaminated, because he was not hi
and we never saw him any more. No
Mr.. Boyce said he left the afflda'
with me, and they told n
think, to give It TO \
Tooie. or at any rate say to MIR. To
that he could make such use OF it
he wanted TO. He professed to ha
'ult authority 70 use II. notwlthstandi
that agreement at Helena, and we w
at some loss to know what TO do un'
the circumstances. had solemi
pledged Darnold that l would not l
the afndavit without his further G,
INA sent. The circumstances under VIII
he left and the unsatisfactory expl'
alton given by Mr.. Royce led me
strongly suspect that there was so
understanding between Darnold Q
Royce. l know hat my feeling v
that the andavit might be false q
that Il might be improper and dang
Gus to attempt TO use II. We were
Mr.. Corbett's ONCE. Mr.. Corbett
been in the employ OF Mr.. Root In
original contest case. He was not