The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-07-02
SEALED VERDICT is IN
The Jurors in the Whiteside Case
Out Only 35 Minutes.
TO BE REVEALED TODAY
II Il Thought In Helena That the De-
PENDANT Has won-Governor Smith
Gives Sensational Testimony.
Strong Speeches Mad
Special pispatch TO the STANDARD.

Special Dispatch TO the Standard.
Helena, July 1.-The Cole-whiteside
damage suit went to the jury about 6
O'Clock tonight. and in IS minutes the
II men had arrived at a verdict. The
court in the meantime had retired from
the court house. after giving instruc-
tons TO the jury 20 return a sealed YER
dict. The verdict OF the IL men will be
announced tomorrow morning. II is
generally surmised tonight that the
verdict has been for the defendant, al
though this is a matter of conjecture.
To-day ended one of the most sensa-
tional cases tried in Helena in some
time. The first witness called this
morning was the defendant. who was
asked on cross-examination some tech
meal questions. After Whiteside had
left the stand. f. g. Russell was called
to tell of an alleged threat that had
been made agains him by the plain
tin. Miss Reideker. a stenographer for
j. c. Paulson. was asked IL she had
written letters for the deceased to the
Cincinnati firm in regard to Seymour
Davis. She said she had, but could not
remember their contents.
X. 3. Kennedy, the present secretary
of the capitol commission, was asked
to testify as to the amount of money
expended by the old capitol commits
sion He read from a prepared state
ment that approximately the total ex-
penditure was Sac. 3s5.72. not including
some items OF interest charge that had
been transferred. He gave the expense
OF the commission that selected the
capitol site as 81. 446. The per diem and
expenses of the members of the COM
mission amounted to 81. 654. Is. divided
as follows: c. X, Cole, 81. 1856. so; w. NJ.
n"
Sl.o02.65; ]. Z. Richards. s27.75. The
amount paid r. G. Mann was S22. 500;
the secretary's salary was Sl,S33. 35.
The sum paid for second prizes was
5000, and other expenses amounted in
all to sac, 939. ~, which, added TO the
amour expended by the capitol site
commission. gave the grand total given
above. The witness showed that dur
ing this time the receipts from the
lands of the Office were 50, 400.
Governor Smith was the next wit
ness. After the governor had been
asked the usual preliminary questions,
the Following questions were asked:
Q.-Do you remember about the time
the minority report was signed and de-
llvered to the house Of representatives?
time.
Q.-Did o see DR.. Cole about that
time? Al think ! saw DIR. Cole the
night before II was reported to the
house; i am not sure about the exact
time.
estate the circumstances under
which you saw him. A.-why, DIR.
Cole either met me I'm the Helena hotel
or else sent some one to me; ANYHOW
we met in the lobby of the Helena ho-
tel and he asked me (here counsel for
the plaintiff made n vigorous objection.
and after argument the court permit
ted the witness to proceed). As said.
tAI
ouced IN the house j met DR.. Cole I'm
the Helena hotel. and he took me I'm
that little private office right back of
the clerks desk. and We sat there. and
while in there he told me he had heard.
In fact. i believe he said that III had
seen a copy OF a minority report that
Mr.. Whiteside was going to present tC
the house of representatives.: that this
report of Mr.. Whiteside was doing him
and other members of the commission
a great injustice, and that II / had
any influence with Mr.. Whiteside would
j exert my influence 10 see that Il was
not introduced In the house, and I said
70 him / did not know what influence
] a with Mr.. whiteside, but that I
would see him and ask him that If ne
had nothing but a lame statement of
fact not to do so TO iniure any one |
Immediately left DIR. Cole and went up
to the house. and l saw Mr.. Whiteside.
III was tnen perhaps y CLOCK IN TIE
evening. and I said to Mr.. whiteside
that / understood from DIR. Cole that
q eport OF this kind was to be In
troduced, and 1 said unless you have
good foundation or good reasons for IL
! wouldn't do II just to smirch the
name or character OF any man, and Mr..
Whiteside said TO me-(objection Of coun-
sci for the plaintiff because plaintiff was
not present.: objection s~ustained).
Q.-what did Mr.. Whiteside do? A.
He showed me the report he had pre-
pared.
o.-what did you do them Al read
II.
I handed II back to MIR. Whiteside, and
] think the same report was introduced
next day in the house.
Odd you testify before the com
mittee of which Mr.. whiteside was a
member? Al did.
Q.-was MI. whiteside present when
you testified. Al believe he was.
OIL will call your attention TO the
answer in this case and see whether OF
no that was the testimony you gave
before the committee (handing witness
the answer containing his evidence be
fore the investigating committed. Coun'
sci for plaintiff objected to the intro
duction Of what witness testified: OBJ
lection overruled). A.-That Is the
substance of what ! said.
o. You may tell HI you testified
A. The subject matter here Is a con-
versation DR.. Riddell had with me. The
first meeting Of the board ] attended
was on Monday. Ian. II. 1897. ! be
iieve IL was a few days after that Sena-
tor Riddell called al my office dowr
here in the court house. one afternoon
before j left the office. DR.. Riddell said
TO me: You know there was a meeting
OF the capitol commission last night
said: NO; / did not" He said: i
was told by Senat Flowerree that ne
(Flowerree) had been sort of dragged